At a time when the top DOD adviser to military commissions has been barred from participation in hearings at Gitmo, questions are being asked — and ought to be — about the propriety, legality, and politicization of what should have been a whole host of decisions founded in the rule of law and in pursuit of justice. That this is no longer the first expectation when examining the record is testament to how far we have fallen in the last few years.
Last week, several policy experts testified before the House Judiciary Committee regarding torture and the betrayal of American values and the rule of law. One of the experts was Philippe Sands, human rights lawyer and author of Torture Team, whose preview in Vanity Fair exposed a whole new level of depravity within the Bush Administration for throwing aside prior restraint and morality and, instead, turning to the very actions we once officially reviled.
Bill Moyers had an extraordinary interview with Philippe Sands recently that deserves a much wider viewing. You can watch it here, but I want to highlight a specific segment:
PHILIPPE SANDS:So take Diane Beaver….She had been the person down at the bottom who’d signed off on aggressive interrogation….But she described to me the pressure she felt herself under, the anniversary of 9/11 coming up.
This man, detainee 063, al-Qahtani, present and caught. Tremendous pressure coming from the upper echelons of the administration. She described to me a visit that the administration has never talked about in which the three most important lawyers in the administration, Mr. Gonzales, who’s the president’s lawyer, Mr. Addington, who is the vice president’s lawyer, and Mr. Haynes, who is Secretary Rumsfeld’s lawyer– came down to Guantanamo at the end of September, talked to them about interrogations and other issues, watched an interrogation, and left with the message, do whatever needs to be done. Now, put yourself in Diane Beaver’s situation. You’re getting a signal from the main man at the top of the administration: do whatever needs to be done. That takes the lid off and opens the door.
BILL MOYERS:Was there a single architect of the decision, the person who said, "Take the gloves off?"
PHILIPPE SANDS:There was one lawyer in particular who everyone kept referring to as being, if you like, the brains. I’m slow to use that word for such an awful series of events. But the driving force behind it, and that was David Addington. I know Diane Beaver and Mike Dunleavy, who was her boss, the head of interrogation at Guantanamo, told me that when they came down, it was obvious that Addington was the main person. He was the leader of the team. He was, I think they were very anxious around him, with his big booming voice, his big beard. Nothing is known about him in detail. He’s never, previously, I gather, appeared before Congress. And he’s now, just been subpoenaed. I think he may well have been the driving force. But he wasn’t speaking off his own back. I mean, he was speaking for the vice president. And I think that the finger of responsibility in the end, will most likely go to the vice president. But Mr. Rumsfeld was deeply involved. And, of course, the president has indicated just within the past month, that he signed off on everything.
PHILIPPE SANDS:Yeah. It’s called the U.S. Army Field Manual, and it’s the bible for the military. And the military, of course, has fallen into error, and have been previous examples of abuse. But never before–
…No one is saying it hasn’t happened before. But apparently, what hasn’t happened before is the abandonment of the rules against cruelty. And the Geneva Conventions were set aside, as Doug Feith, told me, precisely in order to clear the slate and allow aggressive interrogation. (emphasis mine)
David Addington has been subpoenaed to testify before the House Judiciary Committee regarding these interrogation policies and other issues on June 26th, along with John Yoo, author of a number of the legal documents ginned up to provide cover and justification for these actions. The ACLU, whose work on civil liberties issues, FOIA requests and with detainee treatment specifically has been an enormous part of exposing some of this illegal behavior, had this to say about the House Judiciary hearing:
"The House Judiciary Committee is setting in motion something that should have started four years ago when the public learned about the torture of prisoners in US custody at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo bay detention facilities." said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. Fredrickson added that the ACLU urges the committee to "focus clearly on who did what at the highest levels of government, and whether crimes were committed. It’s time to legally compel Bush’s team to tell the truth."
I discussed these issues a bit yesterday on Sam Seder’s show, with Glenn Greenwald and Cliff Schecter. (You can listen to the podcast, linked at The Sideshow.) We all agreed that a lot of this information has been out there for a while, but it is the filling in of the details on the whos and whats that has had real value in understanding how things could have gone so wrong.
During the Libby trial, David Addington’s testimony was one of the bigger puzzles — remember what Marcy saw was a quiet, professorial personality type in Addington, who just spilled and spilled while Fitz was questioning him on the stand. But Sands characterizes him as a forceful fellow with a booming voice — which matches up with Jane Mayer’s and others previous reporting on Addington when he’s functioning as Cheney’s enforcer. It will be interesting to see which Addington shows for Congressional testimony.
Leaving aside the potential for delusional sadism brought on from too much exposure to fictional television, just how did we get here from being the nation that previously championed the rule of law and human rights? And how to we bring ourselves back from this betrayal of American values at the highest levels of our own government? And, worse, how do we assure ourselves that we are getting information from a properly skeptical media — and not some propaganda arm of the Administration?
(YouTube of Sands’ testimony before HJC.)
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
(((( QuakerGirl)))
Great Monday AM post. Which Addington will we see?
Morning Jim — getting another cuppa coffee. **YAWN**
Good morning Christy
Quiet at the Lake this morning. I watched the PBS Special and followed it up with the congressional hearing with Sands on Saturday. I think we have found our person to push these themes in terms everyone can understand.
Lots of excellent links to explore in this post, CHS, thanks.
Which Addington will testify? If he actually shows up, my bet is on Ginormous Ego Addington, the supremely confident lawyer who’s certain he can run rings around any question asked of him, not the Spill-All Addington Fitzgerald questioned. Stakes are a lot higher personally for Cheney’s Cheney this time ’round.
Somehow I can’t believe he’ll even show up, though.
I can agree, non of themwill show up. It’s disgustinghow this administration just ignores Congress’s role in oversight. It makes me queesy for the November elections.
Tomorrow is primary day here in WV. I’m taking The Peanut with me to vote in the morning — as I always do — and will try and have some reporting for you all on turnout. Plan on making a few calls today to see how early voting has been going…
not sure about the prior morality – i think it was more an issue of restraint in getting others to do our torturing for us.
see bill clinton’s extraordinary rendition
see school of the americas
this has been a long time coming. maybe now that it’s gotten so extensive and so outrageous with the current administration going all jack bauer, we can shine a light on the whole sordid mess and repudiate it all.
This is very different from how I remember his demeanor when appeared under oath in the Libby Trial.
Christy, you linked to Marcy’s second thread of Addington’s testimony, but the first day is even more telling. Here’s a few snips from Marcy’s liveblog of that first day on the stand.:
From Iran-Contra to Gitmo torture. Wonderful resume, David.
Later on, Marcy notes: “THis guy mumbles and has no apparent neck.”
Still later, there’s this exchange with Fitz:
You kind of get the idea that Adddington likes throwing his weight around when he’s in charge, but that big booming voice kind of disappears when the shoe is on the other foot.
If any House Judiciary Committee staffers are lurking, it might be worth revisiting Addington’s appearance in Judge Walton’s courtroom, and perhaps even chatting with Fitz about how one might handle him when he appears before the committee.
If any House Judiciary Committee staffers are lurking, please follow philippe sand’s advice and don’t ask about the law and what constitutes torture. ask only about the facts of who, what, when and where.
Thus far, Yoo has agreed to appear voluntarily and Addington has said he’ll appear if subpoenaed, which has has been. I think they will be at the hearing. But I’m not hopeful that we’ll get uch of substance beyond the usual obfuscation and passing-of-the-responsibility-buck tap dance in the way of answers. Lots of invocation of executive privilege and some smoke and mirrors, and a whole lot of frustration in between.
But there is value in making them publicly squirm and refuse to answer even the simplest of questions. Recall the idiocy that was Alberto Gonzales’ “I don’t recall, Senator.” routine…and how the public reacted to it.
This literally sickens me. This represents the leadership cabal of the United States of America. I am ashamed “we” have allowed anything like this to happen in our lifetime. Did we learn anything, anything at all, from WWII Germany? What do rank and file Republicans say about this? I’m not being incendiary. I want to know.
Asking him to comment on Yoo’s legal draftsmanship could be amusing.
“Let’s talk about Youngstown. Isn’t it odd that this never appears in Yoo’s unclassified torture memo?”
But even getting “I assert my fifth amendment rights” and “I assert executive privilege” for a couple of hours might drive home to the media and the nation how deep this administration is up to its neck in things it wants to keep secret.
Ever since the outrage over the first round of pictures from Abu Ghraib died down I knew nothing would happen. I still wonder how that outrage was not harnessed in a way as to bring this whole thing out and clean it up. The torturers in chief have been working some pretty strong mojo, getting away with it, and I have little to no confidence that they will be brought to justice.
Beyond tragic. Beyond criminal. Words fail.
And after the testimony (or lack thereof) asking the candidates their response to it.
Just noticed that this testimony is scheduled for June frickin’ 26th. Is that 2008?? Not much sense of urgency, eh? The wheels of “justice” grind exceedingly slowly.
That little nugget about Addington’s service on the staff of the Iran-Contra committee makes me wonder about what lessons he learned there about how to mess with congressional investigations and how to use them to protect yourself legally.
Can you say “Oliver North”?
Perhaps Lawrence Walsh might want to help the HJC with its prep work.
Great analysis as always Christie. I find myself continuously puzzled at the embracing of torture by this administration. I do use embrace deliberately because they do indeed seem to have great affection for the idea. The most logical reason I can conclude is simply that they are really a bunch of sadistic, emotionally stunted boys walking around in adult bodies. Still blowing up frogs with firecrackers. It would be pathetic and sad if it wasn’t so repellant and absolutely un-American.
The House has so many important matters to attend to—like voting to affirm and then deny the value of the original intent of Mother’s Day. Getting to the bottom of torture is just noth high on their priority list. And this with a Dem. Speaker.
in my experience, it’s usually similar to what most democrats say about clinton’s policy of extraordinary rendition or even the SOA. hard to hear, hard to believe, try to find excuses… imo, it’s human nature that the defenses come up first and only with time and repetition will it sink in.
but i’ve come to think the defensiveness is a good thing – because it indicates how much the person (R or D) hates even thinking that torture has been done in our name and by politicians we’ve supported.
it’s the people who find it fun and exciting that scare me.
confidence, no. but on my better days i have hope. call it irrational faith :)
Actually, it was difficult finding a day when they could get both Yoo and Addington in the room together — I heard scheduling this was a pain in the ass. They wanted it earlier, but having them together so that they can’t play one against the other in answers was important…
From the “it will be interesting” link in the next-to-last paragraph above:
Any chance of Jack Goldsmith offering a few words at the hearing? Or perhaps he might whisper a few words in the ears of the staff: “If you ask Addington about X, his response would be very enlightening . . .”
They scare me, too, selise. But the rank and file are voting! They’re basically asking McBush to perpetuate BushCo’s un-American policies for another four years. Whether or not they succeed, it blows my mind that roughly half of “us” will do that. Denial is a dangerous cocoon.
Do we get to put them in separate cages?
I’m sittin’ in the same pew with MarieR & meg……..na’gna’hapn. :-(
Nobody *ever* accused me of not being a realist.
And those who are voting are finding higher hurdles to jump to do so. The Thugs won’t stop until they can figure out how to disenfranchise every dem. out there.
Hmmm. Denial or ignorance?
yep. but close to half of us (Ds) voted for a candidate who’s claim to experience was an administration that instituted the policy of extraordinary rendition and did not shut down the school of the americas.
imo, it’s painful to think about, so we try not to. there are lots of distractions available, it’s not hard to do.
I think they will show up. Then they get to do the Abu Gonzo two-step. Step one, “I don’t recall” step two, “that information is classified/protected and I cannot answer the question.”
Rinse. Repeat.
I had two possible scenarios pop into mind when Addington & Yoo went on the HJC testimony slate- somehow A & Y contrive a way to not show up, or a mysterious, inexplicable “event” of some sort shuts down the hearing/the building/the entire Hill before or during their testimony ;->
You know, just imagining Addington and Yoo doing the AGAG two step makes me smile.
That worked out so well for Gonzales, after all, that he’s spending a whole lot of time with his family these days. Even the wingnut welfare outfits seem not to want him around.
I’d say that most of the voters for both Dem candidates would have no idea what you were talking about even if you asked them point blank about it. Because coverage on all of that has been minimal at best and most people just aren’t that well-informed in terms of the fine print on issues.
They just aren’t. It’s sad, but there you are…and most of them don’t care to be any more informed than they are at the moment, either. It was a huge part of the challenge doing canvassing in 2004, trying to educate people about Kerry versus Bush and having people not even give a shit that the Swift Boat crap was a bunch of lies — they just didn’t care to know because they had other things to worry about instead, thank you very much.
Most of America just doesn’t care. And that is the sad fact that those of us who do have to comes to terms with — and figure out a way to break through it somehow…soon.
I’m now wondering whether Hillary’s relentlessness in pursuing the presidency might be attached just a bit to a desire/need to maintain the facade/cover-up of what they did while in office.
Just thinking.
The clock of legal justice grinds exceedingly slowly and
the strategery of this WH has been to stonewall to the end. Yet since hesring Sands I am confident that these war crimes will be pursued internationally.
I’ll take my justice one drip at a time like Watergate.
What is missing from the 1970’s is Rethugs like Fein who moved it in a bipartisan manner and a Press that was doing what it used to do.Oh and a Leader in the House who put impeachment ON tht Table.
details. . . . details. You have to be so picky?
It is painful. I don’t want to think about it either. And until FDL brings it round periodically, I don’t have to (all the time, anyway). And thereby hangs this tale. Denying/ignoring/condoning is only possible in a vacuum. What we have going here is the equivalent of book burning. Having seized the MSM, BushCo and the Pugs (sounds like a rock group) have shut down most of the journalistic venues. Have, in fact, elevated FOX to the go-to place to support a point of view that all of this is all right. People in denial are not very likely to seek out places like FDL that speak truth to atrocities.
Nice post. I agree with kelven @17: It starts from the top. This is why the recent quotes from Bush in Sanchez’s memoir are so revealing. A President who enjoys shouting “Kill them” is not someone who can be relied upon to restrain the forces of atavism.
i think you are very right, and i should add that point when i discuss the issue.
but i’m not so sure about not caring…. granted i’m working off of a very small sample, but i can’t get a sense about this from a short conversation. here’s the thing… if people really don’t care about torture, then why do people (me included – you should have seen me when i first found out about the clinton administration) feel so defensive? i think that is a sign of caring too – just not a very helpful one.
btw, do click thru on this piece from David Cole discussing Addington’s role in the context of Goldsmith’s book — it is well worth a read and then some…
amen barbara.
I don’t mean they don’t care about torture — I think everyone cares about it in the abstract. They just don’t care to know the details.
I look at it like what we saw with CT voters and the Lamont/Lieberman race. Far too often, people said they were voting for Lieberman because they liked him. But when you talked to them about specific policy issues — choice, the Iraq mess, support for all things Bush, the import of Rovian thug squads to GOTV for Lieberman after he got his ass kicked in the primary — no one rally liked the individual bits and pieces. But there was an outright refusal to see that as something which stuck to Lieberman if they already supported Lieberman. And no matter the facts and the details, it just didn’t stick. Still doesn’t in some quarters.
Some people just like living comfortably along with their heads in the sand, coming up for air only when something bites them directly in the ass…as much as it pains me to type that. And how we break through that? It’s a question we really HAVE to answer before November…
Also, it doesn’t help that people are really, really burned out on politics at the moment from the long primary season. So breaking through on anything at the moment is next to impossible…
Christy,
It’s in there, the constitution.
Free Press ,no imbeds
Free Speech ,no free speech zones
Declaration of war, no authorization to use force
Geneva Convention what part of torture isn’t clear
Impeachment….well you get the idea.
Yeah, we do. And it’s hard to get past thinking we’re totally screwed. Public protests have been pretty successfully labeled a quaint throwback to hippie yesteryear. And the MSM largely ignories the substance of them anyway. There must be a venue, an approach we haven’t yet discovered. Town criers and broadsheets?
If I remember correctly, you were one of the folks asking about the possibility of FDL teevee, weren’t you? We have a surprise coming up that ought to make you pretty happy…but I don’t want to spoil it, so that’s all I’m saying. *G* (Why yes, I am aware that was both cruel and unusual teasing. Why do you ask?)
Good Morning Christy and Firedogs,
talkin’ straight outta my you know what here – one can not be a Ginormous Ego and something else. the something else is a conceit of the GE. he knew to be wary of Fitz so his solution was to go all bureaucrat on the stand – and look how well that worked out for him
he fancies himself Kaiser Soze, but unlike Rove he has his fingerprints all over everything – thanks for the finishing touches Mr. Sands
I am the one. BOOYAH!!!!!!! (whatever it is!)
Stupid Guy Doug Feith does love his torture. In fact Dougie was part of almost neo-con every War Crime.
Stupidest Guy On The Planet, Doug used forged evidence to claim that a alliance existed between Irak and Bin Laden. But the real policy was to ignore Al Qaeda, and start wars against Irak, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and any other weak country. This makes Feith guilty of War Crimes for starting illegal wars. But Feith has also committed treason against the United States, by letting Al Qaeda commit terrorism, while pretending to fight them.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/M…..7Ak01.html
I cannot believe how few people are publicizing the fact that we loose information when we have programs endorsing torture
this is two fold I might add and the second part of the fold is never discussed
1) the person being tortured will say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear, whether or not they have information
so assets are wasted pursuing leads that are not likely accurate, and even when a person does have information, when tortured they are more likely to give misleading information then accurate
the “ticking bomb” scenario can’t possibly work since the ticking bomb will go off long before the person tortured is revisited for giving flawed information
the methods of persuasion are far more productive and the real professionals know this, the only people that want to make believe torture is effective are Chaney’s minions, the idiots in “team b”
now for part two
2) when we are known to have policies that include torture a person will never surrender, they will never think our side is the better side, they will never advocate surrendering
I remember the stories of world war two where the soldiers were happy to surrender and cooperate because they knew we would not torture them and they had a chance of a normal life when the war wound down
everyone needs to look at this part two because it is essential if we really do want to make Iraq an aly, if we really doe want to “win their hearts and minds” they must not fear us, they must respect our cause and how we go about securing our cause
think of all the information we have lost because the Iraqi people now hate us since they know we have programs of torture
no longer will the child of someone who agrees with us come to officials and tell of something their friends told them
that is so huge it cannot possibly be given enough weight
now if someone overhears of a plot they try to become part of the plot instead of thwarting it
but there is a part three as well;
3) the administration knew everything I just posted and they wanted unrest, they did not want the Iraqi people to form their own government they wanted us to be the government, they wanted an occupation, they need the insurgency so they can continue pillaging the treasure of the middle east and the assets of the American middle class
Christy -
thanks very much for the David Cole link on Goldsmith – something early on in the first Frontline featuring him made the little hairs on the back of my neck stand up – now I know what that was
yes, as far as Darth is concerned, the mission has been accomplished according to his plan.
I think I stopped breathing while I watched Bill Moyers interview Phillipe Sands on Friday night. I had read here bits and pieces about what he was saying, but her laid it out so well, and had those personal stories of the interviews and research for his book.
As for which Addington will show up, that’s a good question. I also wonder how dog on a bone the committee will be. There have been times when they were more wonderful than others.
I’m hoping, praying that just maybe, with his authoritarian personality, we might get a moment like in A Few Good Men, if the right questions are pressed, he might trip.
I’m probably delusional, but surely, it would be a nice show.
We lock those people who brought our nation to this point in cages. We put them on international trial and lock them up until they are dead.
That’s how.
I did a panel with David at Take Back America, and so I did quite a bit of reading prior to the panel discussion on his prior writing on civil liberties to make certain I was up to speed on his perspective. (Yes, I do completely over-prepare for panels and other public appearance things. I can’t help myself…) His work on civil liberties questions in the age of terror has been extraordinary — he does quite a bit of work with the Center for Constitutional Rights litigating these issues. And I thought that piece on the Goldsmith book was particularly useful.
I’ve been wanting to highlight it for a while, I just kept forgetting to link it in for some reason. (doh!)
ooooo, I’m on pins and needles with this, Christy — I was actually questioning my middle daughter(the techy) about what sort of camera I would need to use in order to do videos to send to you guys. We have some major Middle East researchers and professors at the local SUNY center.
So far in my viewing of House hearings, each has 5 minutes to get in one, maybe two questions. They all come in prepared with their own questions rather than with a collective game plan that allows each to build on the previous questions. And of course, the thugs swoon over their uber patriots with their “questions.” Then sometimes a nugget is picked up a couple of days later after pouring over the transcript but by then the public has moved on.
Not very satisfying.
Well, they *do* have that technique down to both an art and a science so, on second thought, I’m switchin’ to your pew.
TobyWollin, TobyWollin, where are you???
I hope they show up, but will be surprised, since Mukasey has declined to enforce recent congressional subpoena’s. If he did show up, my guess is that Addington would adopt the in-your-face, what’s it to ya, demeanor of Cheney, since they appear to be contemptuous of Congress and deny it’s authority over them.
I think much of the public haven’t thought about, or just doesn’t grasp the point made by Sands, and attributed to George F. Kennan, about not becoming our enemies in order to fight them.
Regarding any innate revulsion to torture, “Justice” Scalia’s interview implication that cruel and unusual treatment would be perfectly constitutional as long as the purpose is something besides punisment, was pretty enlightening (or depressing).
(softly, in your ear)Right here, Barbara…right over here..
LOL
Something’s in the wind at FDL . . . well, more so than usual, even. We be jazzed!!
I thought the Kennan point was a particularly good one — but perhaps that’s because I know quite a bit on his background as the father of the Cold War containment policy, among other things, and how revered he was in conservative foreign policy circles as a result. It may not resonate as much outside geeky circles. *g*
Yes, I’ve watched some hearings also. I think I recall a very few times when things kind of got rolling and they played off each other to keep it going. Maybe I’m disremembering.
Do you think it would help if we emailed the committee and asked them to work together? If we reminded that there are people out here who really do care about torture and lawlessness, people who are their constituents who expect results?
goin’ o/t
7.8 quake hits Southwest China
reuters
i don’t think i ever had someone tell me that that they were voting for lieberman because they liked him. in my experience they had a narrative in their head (he’s strong on the environment was a big one) and pesky contradicting statements from the nice lady on their doorstep wasn’t going to penetrate without a lot more effort. best i could hope to do was to suggest that maybe things were not as they seemed.
maybe i’m projecting my own experience too much, but i was taught some pretty reactionary things in the church of my youth – and contradictory information and even experience didn’t just throw a switch and get me to change my views overnight. it took not just time, but a lot of effort (reading to get different ideas and thinking on my own) and at first was scary as hell. that’s why i think, the more challenging new information is to one’s world view (and especially sense of self) the more difficult it is to process and integrate it. it takes time even when it’s being dealt with. and with our culture seemingly designed to distract us – sadly, not much is getting dealt with. but maybe i have more hope than you do – because i was one of those people living with her head in the sand (until sept 12, 2001), so i have faith that if i could be made to take notice, so can others.
re: november. competing narratives might help on the margins for one election – but i think we have much deeper problems, like how do we construct our narratives? – are they based on reason and reality or something else? and that is work for more than one or a few election cycles.
Do I think it would help? LOL. They are perfectly capable of putting together a game plan if they want to. There are a lot of talented folks there and though quiet in demeanor and not as sharp as he once was, Conyers has a top notch staff and some back of the scenes help rendered by people we know and love.
They have choices to make and what we see is what they choose to show us. YMMV.
I think I’m just having a frustration week this week from fighting a lot of the same fights over and over again. But this too shall pass… *g*
eli had a great thread yesterday and I about “why do republicans hate the law”
I thought this would be a great idea for a presidential race commercial with fdl posters who contribute asking the questions;
we can attack their brand during the election
“why do the republicans hate the law”
we hit them with ALL their lawless behavior and PUNISH their brand
“why do republicans hate the constitution”
“why do republicans hate our armed forces”
“why do republicans ignore national threats”
“why do republicans hate science”
“why do republicans hate religous freedom”
“why do republicans hate democracy”
“why do republicans love to hire judges that give our rights to corporations?
man, we can go on forever and I think all these questions compiled with a collage of proof would make an incredible add campaign
“why do republicans hate concervatives”
“why do republicans hate tax cuts for the middle class”
“why do republicans give middle class assets to their wealthy contributers”
I strongly agree with everything you wrote. I’d like to add that keeping us in perputual war mode is to side track us while they steal our rights away from us, one by one…
and worse, the questions (hjc members) usually seem written by an aide because there is no (or completely lame) follow up questions by the person how asked the questions (davis is a stand out exception).
lame, lame, lame. that was one of the things that so pissed me off during senator reid’s visit – that he would be proud of all the hearings the senate (which is almost as bad as the house) has held. obviously he hasn’t been watching.
as you keep reminding us (and I keep reminding myself and others) this is a marathon and not a sprint. If I didn’t keep that in my mind, despair would rule.
yes, lame is a polite word for it, but a good one.
We need to convince the rest of The American People of the same issue. Shoot – just to clean up some of the messes that Bush/Cheney have caused at the departmental level is going to probably take the entire next term.
think progress has think fast up right now and this is telling indeed;
Christy – this is completely OT, but how do I get the little ‘f’ to appear next to my name. I put my facebook stuff into my profile, but do I have to do something else? Send fresh baked goods to Jane?
Well, nothing that popping on some Violent Femmes and dancing around the sunroom won’t cure for the moment. Blister in the Sun, anyone?
which means we need to impress this strongly on the younger generation of new voters. They will be expecting miracles that are just not realistic. It will be a struggle to keep them engaged as the complex work of cleaning up the mess begins.
The least they should do is send out little Thank You notes. “Thank you for allowing us access to your most personal and confidential information through our newly expanded spying rights. If we need you for anything else, we’ll be sure to contact you.”
I think the last update may have zeroed that out — it was causing some hang problems for a while with Wordpress. But I’m not positive. Let me check on that…
i’m frustrated, disappointed and disheartened much more of the time than i am hopeful, especially recently. that’s why whenever i have a spark of genuine hope i try to share it…
The problem with this, as I see it, is painting all Republicans with a broad brushstroke. Much as it grieves me, I have a couple of rightie adult kiddos. One salvageable, the other intractable. The greater brand issue may be (again for the rank and file) that they are supporting a government that (your long, accurate list). I honestly don’t think it occurs to Repugs by and large that your list is what they’re standing for. Most (not all, of course) are essentially decent people. Many (most?) are voting without thinking. Conditioned response. Votes of their parents and poker pals and, and, and. Somehow, this has to be done without shaming the feces out of ‘em because shame drives ‘em into the same shell as torture denial. How now?
The least they should do is send out little Thank You notes. “Thank you for allowing us access to your most personal and confidential information through our newly expanded spying rights. If we need you for anything else, we’ll be sure to
contact youjust sneak into your house and take it without notice and without bothering to obtain a warrant either. Suck it up, citizen.”Corrected that for you…
Yes. For many decades, however, the Kennan containment policy was known as the Truman Doctrine. It served as our essential Cold War policy until Viet Nam caused some questioning of it’s precepts. In those days, it was more of a Democratic Policy and the Democratic Party was often referred to as the party of internationalism and war, and the Republican Party was thought of as more isolationist. Sorry, wandered too far off topic.
It’s gray and drizzly here in LA this am and I’m not felling any happier.
Have to run the kiddo out to school. Maybe I’ll pick up a firelog on the way home and then do some cooking. That always makes me feel better.
But, make no mistake. I’m here for the marathon.
Christy, are we scheduled for another law seminar later today?
So much nicer than “If we need you for anything else, we’ll be contacting you at 3 a.m. some morning with armed Homeland Security personnel.”
And then it became a pseudo-underpinning for neoconnery, even though Kennan would have been appalled at what they used him as justification for…I once had a very heated Q&A moment with the odious Frank Gaffney on that point.
in that case we will do;
“why have these republicans abandoned the real republican principles”
and go on from there
OT
both Think Progress and C&L have posted some choice archival footage of BillO losing it on camera.
Christy, I saw that Sands interview with Moyers on Friday, and was sickly fascinated, listening to him describe his experiences in GB with the IRA, and what he had learned about torture here.
That description of the three lawyers going down to Gitmo made my blood run cold.
He’s got a new book out – any chance you can get him in a book salon?
I think even Henry “Scoop” Jackson would have been appalled. He as more of a conventional strong national defense, Roosevelt Democrat, very liberal on domestic policy, and the neo-cons have perverted his positions into their insane imperialism.
the absolutely only way i’ve found is to be as brutally honest about the Ds as i’m capable of. it has only been when i’ve owned up to my own shame in failing to hold my party and the politicians i’ve supported to the standards and values i claim to care about that i have been able to break through.
ymmv. and i’d love to know what has worked for other folks…
Pretty sure we are working on it…
Conyers has been a wall and I hope he gets re-ellected. He probably could use some campaign donations sent his way. I no longer send $ to the Dem party, only individuals who do their job.
We never finished cleaning up the messes the Nixon Administration made
(Look at the key players in the above narrative)
great! sands’ earlier book is excellent.
conyers gets support from me when he begins an impeachment investigation.
Republics lack any ability to feel shame.
my congresscritter is waiting for Waxman to pull the pieces together before jumping on the bandwagn. Or so he has told me. It would seem that either is fully capable of delivering the goods—should they desire to do so.
hmm. there’s new post but no handy line on the bottom of the thread . . .
yeah.
this, i think, gets back to your earlier point of not expecting much.
imo, the dems are a big part of the problem. (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil …)
well that is the real magilla now aint it ???
the right’s post-Goldwater campaign has been successful in so many of their endeavors – but maybe denigrating politics and through it’s narrative, disconnecting it from everyday life* was the bedrock -folks just no longer see how it is biting them in the ass – every gd day, whether at the grocery store, the gas station, or opening their pay envelope
in my perfect world – the combined DNC-Obama campaign efforts would address it directly – have already given my suggestions on this here ad nauseum –
*funny how civics classes disappeared around the same time
Oh, the worst five words of the last 40 years in my NSHO is “The national nightmare is over.”
The whole Republican way of governance–and one might say, the conduct of their personal lives, eh, Vito?–belies the “values” they profess to hold so dear.
At the core, I think, is what Chee-knee once commented about [paraphrasing] having to use the tactics of the enemy in order to defeat them.
The Republics have gone one better…they have become what they professed to abhor. Force multiplier on Katrina gives you Myanmar. Force multiplier on….
If you missed last night’s 60 minutes’ on detention centers, that also ties in with Dana Priest’s reporting in today’s Post: Careless Detention
Essential reading and viewing. It’s all of a piece, folks, all of a piece.
Prairie Today: Welcome to America
1,840 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hardin Smith and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
This post is very timely because we have a recovery moment in the
primary election so we might get clear focus on the congressional hearings begun on American torture tactics and promised on the Pentagon propaganda machine and the corporate television generals. What I hope that what we get out of lookin’ at both of these is an understandin’ of the roll of the law or the importance of the manipulation of the law in the imposition of anti-democratic authoritarian rule. And what I hope we come to understand is that the law and and the concept of “the rule of law” as we know it depends upon representative politics and the Congress for application and correction, NOT executive administration and NOT the federal courts.
We have long had a federal legal system that has been tooled by the wealthy to represent the interests of property and secure the power of capital in the daily life of the nation. This has been accomplished, of course, by the anthropromorphizing of the corporation by the courts and the use of the courts to impose this Frankenstein experiment on the people of the country. So, the situation we are in today is NOT a break down of the “rule of law” or the administration of the law, but a complete collapse of POLITICS and the political mechanisms where by the idea of the “rule of law” is advanced through the making of law and the oversight of the application of the law by both the executive and the courts.
We have a situation where the corporate courts were allowed by the people’s Congress to seat an unelected executive, the unelected executive then moved to secure the entire system of legal administration of the law through appointments of corporate shills and psychophants. With the court system in the bag and the executive veto, the Congress has been unable to regain control of the makin’ of the law or the application of the law.
So, with a breakdown of POLITICS and the discarding ideology by the parties that purport to represent “the people” politically, we have a totalitarian government legally justified by the corporate courts and secured in power by the application of law by a corrupt executive. We have never achieved a system that has been able to apply or embody the IDEA of the rule of law, we have had a political system that has struggled to progress toward that ideal but with the complete corruption of democratic politics and the abrogation of democratic ideology, we are left with a situation of lawful authoritarian rule left unchecked by the representative branch of government.
The crisis we face is a political one and the law and the idea of a “rule of law” will not be resuscitated until we have a re-application of democratic political ideology. The hearings on torture and the war propaganda machine are a start.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, WE REALLY CAN GET THERE FROM HERE!!
man oh man, this should be a theme of progressives, it would send the fear of god and the prospect of accountability into the hearts of these fascists
If there was a really any desire to get to the bottom of things, they’d start at the beginning and Mary Jo White and Scheuer would be pulled in to testify about how things got their start – - – and their legal authorizations (which sound like they came from White’s office?), but that would be too embarassing to Democrats.
And I kind of hope that the staffers don’t try to ask about Youngstown and legal theory – but limit themselves to facts. I guess if they did ask about legal issues, it would be interesting to hear Yoo and Addington explain what attainder is and includes and whether or not anyone has to go as far, even, as the Bill of Rights to find prohibitions against attainder.
And if they have a brain, they’ll ask about the specifics of bipolar London chefs, 11 yo Afghan children, Kurnaz’s hundreds of pages of “secret” exculpatory evidence, Arar’s kidnapping and torture, el-Masri’s kidnapping and torture, the disappearaance of KSM’s children, the CIA’s role in the “sleeping bag killing” of the Iraqi general who turned himself in, the tens of thousands being held in Iraq and Afghanistan with no process, Donald Vance’s ordeal (he’d be the guy to have sitting next to Yoo on the panel), the torture death of Dilawar, the torture freezing death described by Dana Priest in her older article etc.
Even if they don’t get answers, they need to plaster the record over and over and over and over with the innocent peopole who have been horrifically abused and all under the authorizations of those like Yoo and Addington (direct sign offs by Thompson in the Arar case) etc. It’s true that a lot of the “facts” are old, but the problem is, they’ve never received attention. How many people know who Maher Arar is? How many know about the false confession coerced out of Higazy with threats to his family? How many know about – not Khadr but the OTHER children disappeared from their family and shipped to GITMO, much less the many many more disappeared into Afghan and Iraqi concentrated population camps run by the US.
How many people know about the Chinese Uighurs and the Judge’s rulings about their kafkaesque treatment? how many know about the Kentucky soldier beaten into disability at GITMO in a “training exercise” where tapes were immediately “disappeared” as well? How many people really know that Italy and Germany and Spain etc. all have active investigation of crimes directed and authorizied by the US DOJ?
Not many. OTOH, the Dems in Congress don’t really want people to know those things either – or they would have had a coordinated approach to this a long long time ago. They don’t want people to ask why THEY never asked questions or took action. They want to pretend this is all about a few regrettable instances of some very bad guys like KSM and some dedicated and worried people going a “little too far” but not to worry, it’s not going to happen again. They don’t care that we know have cases like Padilla and Salah that stand what Gorelick, in Mayer’s article Selise linked, and dozens of others said over and over – “how do you prosecute them after what you’ve done to them.”
Apparently, with ease, lack of conscience, and glee at the destruction of the justice system that accompanies those prosecutions. With “clean teams” and hooded torturers testifying to bald faced lies, accompanied by doctored transcripts of interrogations in foreign languages.
Too many years of too many people merrily working away at DOJ despite torture after torture after torture after torture coming out. And too many years of making heroes out of guys who are and were actively culpable for torture support – baseline for decency to the lowest common denominator of a small handful who actually took steps in self interest for self protection and pretending that is somehow admirable. There have been all kinds of JAG officers who have stood up, lost careers, and taken strong stands about torture. Not one DOJ attorney who has done the same. Not one, over years. Years. Hundreds and hundreds, going into thousands, of days of torture and more torture and more torture and more torture – deaths, disappearances, human experimentation, destroyed minds, destroyed health, destroyed families with children whose parents have been disappeared and left them with no defense – and even disappeared children who no one bothers to ever ask about.
Wickedness – no one is really committed to addressing it.
here’s the frightening part though;
the republicans were actually able to demonize the democrats for what nixon did
they insisted he never should have resigned, they insisted the democrats forced him to pull out of viet nam, (as if pulling out wasn’t the best thing that could have happened), they insist nixon was demonized
even though it was the republicans that forced him to resign, even though he pulled out of viet nam and it shocked everyone including the democrats
the republican propaganda machine is incredibly effective
by pointing out that the people in charge right now are not concervative by any stretch of the imagination, that they are not republicans, that they have highjacked the republicans and the concervative mantle
this is simple to do, we can give them an out by saying their party leaders are depraved and have abused their loyalty and turned their party into something discusting
that’s the way to do it, demonize their leaders and give them an excuse
citizen norske, wow. makes sense and rings true. you’ve given me something new to think about. thank you.
Right: we’ve seen alot of hearings when the questioners would rather pontificate than get answers and grill the witness
yes.
but now that it looks like senator clinton will not be the D party presidential candidate, maybe, just maybe, there is the slightest tiny sliver of a window if we dems push hard on this issue. and if we don’t then we are just as guilty as the Rs of failing to hold our political leaders to account.
this is what sands practically begged them to do.
that is why it’s up to us to keep pushing – each other and our party leaders.
1,830 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen selise:
The short version is that we have a corporte fascist state justified by leagal authority and unchecked by democratic politics thru the elected legislature becuase the people and their representatives have been convinced to abandon ideology to be replaced by the self -interest of those who hold the money and issue the paychecks (or not as the case may be). We have never had a system of “rule of law” and this tub of shit we’re in can’t be solved by a simple application of the law (although that IS a start and will be necessary)…this is a political crisis and we need a powerful, political solution that will include the purging of both the executive and the judicial apparatus and ultimately a break-uop of the corporate structure that now rules us.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, WE HAVE ONE MORE CHANCE!!
That is certainly a possibility. One of Ws first actions was to extend the time period that protections the secrecy of presidential records. At the time, folks thought that move was to protect his dad, not thinking how much he would need prolonged cover. Gag.
mary – have you read Darius Rejali’s new book, Torture and Democracy? i have not, and since it’s over 800 pages, i don’t know that i will any time soon.
but i did listen to a very interesting interview he did with george kenney – during which i thought of you several times. you might be interested in rejali’s work… and if you are, you’d be the perfect person to host him here for a book salon. (hint, hint).
….
iirc, you are on dial up? if that is the case, and you are interested in listening to the interview (or anything else) and don’t have a way to download it – i’d be happy to burn you a cd (email is at gmail dot com)
ok, norske – you’ve got me motivated. i’m off to put together this week’s list of congressional hearings. if we want people to pay attention, then i guess we’d better do our bit to help. that’s my idea of “passing the ammunition” *g*
Got side-tracked here for a while. You nailed it!
Motion seconded.
Ooops . . . I’m all alone here. Lonely!
not alone….
Selise 114 – No, I haven’t read it, although I think that I saw a Harper’s “six questions” from Scott Horton on it. I have high speed, but less time, at work. I have evdo at home, but bad connections and it cuts out all the time, so I am hit and miss, depending on the timing. I also have 12 horses and times when I just can’t hit the tubes even with the slower connection. I’ll probably be able to listen to the interview from your link, but not for a day or two. If I don’t get that chance – I may hit you up for the cd. Thank you ma’am.
12 horses!!!???!!
wow, it’s amazing that you have time for anything else.
p.s. offer is open-ended, email me any time wrt to any downloads. many, many thanks for all you do.
Stupid Doug Feith decided to abolish the Geneva Conventions. He call these, “Law in the service of terror.” It is hard to be more “New World Order” than that.
http://www.slate.com/id/2100899/
I saw that Bill Moyers show, and that was a good one. Addington and Cheeney are the big snakes according to Sands. Have you guys thought of getting Sands on FDL? That would be excellant. It would be a cool thread with Emptywheel and Sands together.
I also recommend the segment on nurses for universal healthcare as well.
I also recommend America at Crossroads: Muslim comics. It was on last night. It was sad because of the sh*t these comedians have to put up with and the jokes are often about what it’s like to be under surveillance, discriminated against, ec.. But the comedians were funny and brave. One of the woman comedians has cerebral palsy.
When I get that economic stimulus government check, it is not going toward a better computer (my public pledge). It is going to Center for Constitutional Rights, ACLU, and Amnesty International. It is not going to political campaigns that refuse to actively work for this issue or other issues of civil liberties and human rights.
Such a great idea…to use on our behalf.
Christy,
Thanks once again for pushing this theme. We need answers to your questions!
Bob in HI, where it is now time for breakfast.
Whoa, it turns out we might need that censorship of “violins on television” [to quote Emily Latella] — not to protect our children, but to protect us from what “violence” [i.e., 24] plants in the twisted minds of Addington, Rumsfeld, et. al.
I’ll bet 24 is on all of their TiVos.
Thank you, Mary, for continuing to advocate what should be, but no longer is.
If President Obama opts for a “truth and reconciliation commission” rather than an all-out prosecution for law-breakers, I hope that the Democratic collaborators are outed as well as all Republican miscreants. I’ve been a Democrat for life, but I have grown increasingly ashamed of my Party.
Bob in HI
The full Moyers-Sands interview is essential reading. The contrast between Bush and Lincoln, not least over torture and treatment of prisoners, could not be more startling.
In the most daunting era of our history since the Revolution, Lincoln attempted to appeal to the best we might be. Bush has “gauged our weaknesses” and brutalized them. He appeals, instead, to our lowest fears and petty resentments. That may reflect who he is. It may also be that Shrub is a cunning animal who is not as smart as he thinks, but smarter than we give him credit for, which is itself a victory of cunning over strength.
If Dick Cheney controls Bush’s actions, it’s in large measure Bush agrees with him. He thinks he’s being a manager by “delegating” the work to a “subordinate” like Cheney, so long as he stays out of the limelight. In exchange for the power of the Presidency, Dick finds that an offer he can’t refuse.
***
One reason the differences between Lincoln and Bush are important is this. Despite Lincoln’s prominent advocacy for fair treatment, prisoners on both sides were treated horribly. The “fair play” attitude early in the war gave way to retribution, punishment, starvation and mass death. Revulsion at that outcome is a principal reason we have the Geneva Conventions.*
Imagine the opportunity for mistreatment if Lincoln had said in private to his generals that all Southern prisoners were “fair game”. The South would have responded in kind. Both sides would have actively brutalized their prisoners, denying them food, shelter and medical care, resulting in even greater mass death and burning resentment.
Far fewer brothers, sons and fathers would have limped home. The “War of Northern Aggression” that’s been on simmer ever since would have boiled over more than once. George Bush is planting the seeds for that outcome throughout the Middle East, uncaring about the harvest that only others will reap. John McCain? He doesn’t think Bush has gone far enough; he longs (for others) to be tested in the coming whirlwind.
* The literature on this topic is considerable. A good place to start:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v02/v02p137_Weber.html
This is the heart of the darkness of the Bush/Cheney Administration: launching an “aggressive war” (”the supreme international crime” ~ Justice Robert H. Jackson) and authorizing torture.
The President and Vice President of the United States of America, together with dozens of members of their Administration, should be held to account for the very same indictments prosecuted at Nuremberg.
Whether or not our commitment to Justice is great enough, right now, here in the United States, Sands tells us that prosecutions are being prepared on the international stage.
Personally, I share the outrage and urgency demonstrated by those who have even attempted to subject Bush and Cheney to “citizen’s arrest.”
Marjorie Cohn’s testimony before the Committee, alongside Sands, was no less compelling.
I dearly hope the “hearings” on these matters (at the very least) do not end here.
Thank you, thank you, for this blog post!