Senate Judiciary Hearing on Torture, Two
Whitehouse: SASC report. Great deal of disagreement with OLC analysis. Mora called 2003 OLC memo profoundly in error. To extent that it relied on memo, did not include fair analysis. Chart based on OLC opinion. Green means go column. Read Admiral Dalton, that green column was wrong legally, embarrassing. At Haynes’ direction, directed that OLC opinion supplant opinions of working group. Zelikow, you heard that copies of your memo should be collected and destroyed. What does that say?
Zelikow: Lawyers did not welcome peer review. Would shut down challenges even inside the govt.
Whitehouse: It’s our nature to quarrel with each other. Is there any suggestion you would draw that they were less than perfectly confident with their views?
Zelikow: Arguments I was making were pretty profound, their whole interpretation of CID standard raises grave consequences. They had options. Let’s take another look at this. Or, Zelikow, boy, this shows how rusty you are in practicing law. They didn’t do either of those things, C, we don’t want to talk about it.
Whitehouse: Luban. Lee decision. Texas decision. Addicott didn’t cite it. Lee describes waterboarding as torture. In 93 pages, where they dig out medicare reimbursement, they don’t find a case on point, in which the 5th circuit, calls it repeatedly torture. I’ve pressed the DOJ on this, bc I think it’s unimaginable. AG Mukasey’s response was that it wasn’t relevant under Civil Rights Act, doesn’t relate under CAT. At that time I was out of time. Civil RIghts Act has no substantive elements of its own. Vehicle for enforcing Constitutional violations. Leads directly to Constitutional standards on torture. What OLC said about it–definition also founded on Constitutional standards of US. Impossible by Congress by statute, the statute criminalizing torture cannot create a definition of torture that narrows Constitutional definition. Distinction is yet another false device. They either missed case on point. I guess we’ll find out from OPR which it was.
Luban: Lee case decided in 1983, before CAT and torture statutes. Not surprising that it didn’t exist yet.
Graham: Would it be torture to put a spider inside a jail cell who was afraid of spiders.
Luban: Conceivably.
Graham: Would you say if we put a spider in the jail cell we were torturing them.
Luban: If we knew that spiders are deadly. An ordinary person.
Graham: Mr. Addicott has a different view about torture. Do you think he is unethical.
Luban: I think he would be unethical if he
Graham: You’re basing your opinion that he didn’t cite a case. Is that what this came down to? Is that what you’re telling this committee? How could Mr. Addicott come to an entirely different definition.
Luban: The Ireland case is not the only European case.
Graham: The fact that you didn’t tell me about the Ireland case, can I assume that you are unethical.
Luban: Im not telling you about what is right and wrong.
Graham: You know what I don’t think you’re unethical.
Addicott: I’ve got further bad news for Soufan. Individual who was interrogated while in hospital case. Stevens said that was torture.
Whitehouse: You’re not suggesting it’s torture to question in a hospital. You think it stands for the proposition that any interrogation in a hospital would be torture.
Addicott: that’s what he says in his opinion.
Graham: Do you know a gentleman named Kiriakou? He gave an interview that said Zubaydah, they waterboarded the guy and he broke within 35 seconds.
Soufan: He retracted that last week. That’s one of the things that was mentioned before, and now we know it was 83 times.
Graham: No good information?
Soufan: I would like you to evaluate what we got before.
Graham: I’d like to have both sides of the stories. Apparently they work.
Soufan: It’s easier to hit someone than outsmart them.
Graham: Your testimony is not a complete repository of what happened with high value targets.
Whitehouse: He hasn’t represented himself as anyone else who can represent his experience.
Graham: Do we need to keep doing this? We’re going to make this chilling to the next group that needs to defend this nation. Wrong for Obama to authorize outside AFM?
Soufan: I believe they should ask other professional interrogators.
Graham: Do you believe Panetta qualified for his job. Wyden asked if urgent information. In that situation, ticking time bomb. I think we’d have to do everything possible. Obviously whatever was being used, was not sufficient, I would not hesitate whatever authority needed. Would the POTUS be wrong in considering request beyond AFM, that were lawful.
Soufan: Key quote within the law.
Whitehouse: Add following statements into record. Professional interrogators. Close with words of Matthew Alexander. Led team that located Zarqawi. At the time we killed Zarqawi, he was highest priority, higher than OBL. Lack of evidence that abuse is faster. That method only served to harden resolve of detainee. Second argument against, number one recruiting tool. Majority state the reason they came to Iraq to fight was because of abuse at Abu Ghraib. Not an exaggeration to say that hundreds if not thousands of Americans died because of these techniques. Learned quickly that AQ had much more in common with traditional criminal organizations. Non-coercive subterfuge to great success. I also want to address ticking time bomb. Lived through this every day. Most had knowledge of future bombings. What works best is relationship building. Not time-consuming. Building relationship with prisoner not time consuming. 10-15 minutes, relationship building and deception. It is about being smarter not being harsher.
Graham: These interrogation techniques were shared with members of Congress who somehow can’t remember what they were told. That’s the best evidence that they were trying to make policy, not break the law. If we keep doing this, bring in people to say, let me tell you what I got, we will tear this country apart. The British may not have tortured people in N Ireland. They were legally not torturing people. They made a mistake when it came to winning over the people of N Ireland. If we restrict us to the Army Field Manual, it is the Field Manual to protect themselves. It was never written to be the end-all and be-all of how you protect this nation. If we put it online, and that’s the only way you can interrogate anyone, we’re stupid. We have put people in Gitmo that were not enemy combatants. Some people let go that should have never been let go. Allow us to hold up our head to say no one is in Gitmo because Dick Cheney said so. I’m so afraid that we’re putting men and women at risk who did nothing but their best to try to defend this nation.
Pulling this up from below
Graham and Turner want to argue that people are “pows” for purposes of us being able to hold them forever, but not pows bc we don’t say the Geneva Conventions apply to them.
Guess what – the GCs REQUIRE – not voluntary, but REQUIRE, that someone claiming protected person status gets a full, fair tribunal – just like a real trial. So the problem at GITMO and Bagrama and so many places (and this is under the law of war that Addicot wants to use) is that we have a boatload of people who were NOT TAKEN ON THE BATTLEFIELD!
That’s the problem – the problem with bounties and counter-insurgencies. The problem is we picked up a lot of people in a lot of ways – as Graham mentions, Common Article 3 is to protect civilians and we abandoned that protection of civilians in the GCs.
Addicot is an ass. Louban is making the point that we were NOT compliant with the laws of war and Turner and Graham are spinning.
Whitehouse has taken a good step to say that they didn’t want to subject their work to peer review and that’s normally evidentiary of confidence in the opinion.
The next step from there is that they didn’t want to subject their work to Congressional review, public scrutiny or, and most importantly, Judicial Review.
Whitehouse: Constitution trumps all!
Whitehouse is very good legally on the civil rights act and torture victims act/CAT being claims vehicles for standards that lead back to and are based in the Constitution
… because the prezzie said it was legal. No review necessary. kthxbai.
Luban: the word “torture” has not mysteriously changed its meaning.
Congrats on your award. It is richly deserved.
http://www.hillmanfoundation.o…../2009.html
Yaaaaaaaaaaay!
It’s also been noted over at talkingpointsmemo.
05.13.09 — 11:50AM // link | recommend (2)
“WELL DESERVED
“Marcy Wheeler, aka Emptywheel at Firedoglake.com, has won a Sidney Hillman Award in the blog category. You can check out the citation here — scroll down toward the bottom of the page.”
–Josh Marshall
Graham – trying to interrogate Luban.
But Luban…. reminding that torture is “mental pain and suffering”
Graham, being cruel in his questioning of Luban. (imvho)
(then laughing about it!)
Graham is a Manichean idiot: I need a black and white answer. What a putz!
Here’s a corollary question for Graham: “If we put a naked woman in your cell would it be considered torture?!”
ROFL !!!
Senator Graham Is waterboarding torture? A yes or no answer please.
Graham “have you met Mr. Bybee?”
what the hell does meeting Bybee have to do with the law?
Graham is out of order and looks like an idiot.
Luban: no confusion about definition of torture.
Graham splitting hairs on spiders and Louban falling for it because he’s a lawyer.
It’s not about the specific actions. Torture is the context. They keep using the single techniques to say ”it’s nothing.”
This subtext accomplishes somehting else: it makes the terrorists look like ninnies. Because it is all about the power and us vs. them.
Underscoring:
Schuster now reporting on MSNBC.
He’s zeroed in on the prime truth of this hearing, from the first person account of Soutan, a trained professional.
Information was gained in spite of torture, not because of it.
No matter how the handwringing torture apologists try to spin it.
Graham is total asshole.
Piling on Soufan!!!!! What masters.
Those clips of Soufan’s testimony will gain traction: they are full of electricity. People will soak it up.
Badger. Badger. Badger.
Whitehouse wiping the floor with Addicott.
Soufan “now we know 83 times not 35 seconds”
Graham:”The reason these techniques survived for 500 years is because they work”
EVIL
Yeah the reason murder works is because it kills.
so, lindsay graham believes in witches’ sabbats? cause the inquisition was sure effective in getting actionable intelligence on ladies rubbing flying ointments with themselves, sleeping with the devil and souring milk. i bet reading the court transcripts of the confessions of all the admitted werewolves in medieval france has been particularly enlightening for him. i can’t wait till he announces that lycanthropy threatens our freedom, but must be fought judiciously.
torture is effective at making the victim tell the story the torturer wants. it confirms the torturer’s fear and what they believe they already know. sometimes it twists people so that they can only believe something is true if it is the result of torture. if i recall correctly, in the roman empire there was a time when it was part of the legal process to torture servants before they could testify in court–even if they wanted to testify–because the roman state believed torture ensured the truth.
Graham is a jerk – if Louban was writing a multipage brief he would have told him about it.
Given that Kirakou lied pubically about the waterboarding of Zubaydah shows to go you what kind of intel you get with secret torture -lots of things that have to be retracted later. Unfortunately, you can’t retract a bombing or a war.
And now, on Graham’s line of questioning about good info from torture, is where al-Libi needs to be brought up.
Graham is a total asshole. He’s making my blood boil.
Graham is scared like crazy.
Graham “wants it all to “move forward, turn the page, new chapter”
Soufan “with in the law”
Damn we are not going to hear what Soufan wanted to say when Graham interrupted him the first time..now Whitehouse would not let him finish.
What is with Whitehouse scheduling an appointment right on top of this first of hopefully many hearings on torture. Hope Soufan shares what he was going to say at the next hearing. Would really like to hear what he tried to say twice
Perhaps Marcy can get his comments?
Lovely how Graham said dismissively, “I’ll let you talk, you’re a great American …”
Yeah and he hasn’t let Soufan say anything since. Prick.
That was his plan. Soufan had something important to say, and Graham knew it.
Yep. Soufan can shred Graham’s lame arguments without any effort at all. Graham cannot afford to let Soufan speak.
Yes! Let’s have ALL the records. Yes, sir Mr. Graham.
Oh, wait: now he says we need to move on ~ we’ve seen enough.
ALL the records: Amen!
Oh yeah, I’m gonna believe Cheney’s opinion about interrogation over that of a professional interrogator. Graham is just awful, really really awful. If this is the best defense the Rethugs can mount they are in real trouble…
Graham:
He can see this investigative committee process is not leading in a good direction!
Soufan trying to answer Graham’s question and he keeps interrupting
Why is Whitehouse allowing Graham to bully the witnesses he doesn’t like?
Because Graham is coming off as an asshole. And Soufan is ripping him to shreds.
Kudos to Marcy.
Graham watches too much 24.
Senator Graham…..HAVE YOU NO SHAME?
Call his office and ask that question.
no,we should make postcards thousand of them,ill print some,will folks send them?
Mr.Graham,HAVE YOU NO SHAME?
Just write, “For others, it is unintelligent.”
what does that mean?
“Ticking time bomb,” oh for God’s sake. Read Tom Tomorrow yesterday, you asshole.
I read you TheraP: I learned half of that from you!
Deflect.Divert.Dismiss. – the Repug game plan, which worked really well for a while.
Here’s the follow up to Graham’s ticking time bomb question —
If you found out that you were wrong about the person having info on a ticking time bomb, would you be willing to accept the consequences?
Here’s my argument:
There isn’t a court in the country that would convict an official (CIA, FBI, etc.) who broke a law to save the country from a real “ticking time bomb” and then threw himself on the mercy of the court. The difference here was the Cheney/Bush cabal changed the policy, ILLEGALLY, IN SECRET.
I basically think that’s true. That is not the legal, but the moral and ‘gut’ underpinning of a claim of necessity as a defense. But the claim of NECESSITY is that it actually was necessary. One way you make sure it is never abused is that it is never allowed where someone is wrong.
That’s the problem Graham doesn’t want to address. That “chilling” of what people may or may not do in the future is what the law is intended to accomplish. It should chill torture if someone knows that they go to jail for it unless they are in the situation you mention – the one where almost no jury would ever convict – where there is a direct, impending, demonstable ticking time bomb that was imminent and directly addressed by the criminal action undertaken.
I’ve overused this example and it has holes, but the one I give is this (and I’ll expand it a bit from how I usually use it). Let’s say someone is driving past a home and sees smoke, then hears a baby crying. They stop, shout, no one answers, in the end they break in through a locked window, go up, get the baby, take it out of the house, still no one is around, no ambulances or fire trucks, so they put the baby in the car and drive it to a hospital.
Now – because something like that “might” happen, do you make it “legal” to break into houses and take babies bc, well, if you don’t it might “chill” someone from going ahead and breaking into the house and taking the baby to the hospital in the future? So you need to “legalize” house breaking and baby napping to prevent “chilling” someone’s decision making in that situation in the future?
Now, let’s go on. Someone is driving by, sees smoke, hears a baby cry. Breaks in, grabs the baby, takes it and drives off. But while they are in the house, there’s no smoke in the house. There are voices in the backyard and it smella a lot like someone is barbecuing. There’s a monitor by the baby’s crib and it is turned on. As the “necessity defense” interloper grabs the baby there are noises in the backyard. Once they get to the hospital, the doctors say there is nothing wrong with the baby and start asking awkward questions. The necessity defense interloper grabs the baby back, drives back towards the home which has not burned down. There are police cars though, and distraught sounding groups gathered in the street. The necessity defense interloper then:
a) drives up, very upset, hands back the baby, explains that they thought the house was buring and the baby ill, gives baby back
or
b) drives away with the baby and spends the next 8 years covering up how they got the baby and enlists all kinds of people in the cover up.
Graham is saying, we are at b, but what we need to do is make housebreaking and baby napping legal bc even though we are at b, and make sure no one bears any consequences for b) bc we don’t want to chill someone in the future from breaking in and taking the baby in case it really might be necessary then.
That’s such bull, it’s probably the steam rising from it that is causing global warming.
This is why al-Libi is so important. It’s why he needs to be hammered with how many more Americans would be alive if we handed allowed al-Libi to be totured to Cheney’s orders.
How would Zelikow feel if his son was killed by a released GITMO detainee? Interesting question – but mine would be, Mr. Graham, how do you feel about all the sons and daughters who HAVE BEEN KILLED AND MAIMED and how do you feel about creating one of the world’s worst refugee crises with all it entails – because a man was tortured as a part of govt policy to start a war.
Well?
Waiting.
ticking time bomb DEBUNKED
Great final statement from Matthew Alexander being read into the record. These policies cost thousands of American lives.
Come on Whitehouse let Soufan close with what ever he was about to say
I would bet that as with all other hearings, witnesses will be permitted to submit additional statements for the record. I’m sure Whitehouse will give Soufan a chance to submit the response he would have made.
I’m assuming Soufan has a written statement that’s longer just like the others. I sure hope so!
Thanks, EW… another $50 in the kitty for you in honor of the award
“…for others, it is unintelligent,” heads turns towards Graham.
Graham is trying to have it both ways, constantly saying “I agree with you but there are two sides”
He knows what is coming
the other day on MSNBC
Whitehouse “this is a foundation setting hearing”
“beginning of a several step process. More to come”
“sunlight has to be cast on this’
why is Whitehouse allowing Graham end this hearing. “I believe in the Geneva Convention” What a spinner He can not have it both ways. “coming back to bite you”
Please Please allow Soufan to say what ever he was going to say
Graham does not know what he is talking about.
People are walking out on him!!!!!
Oooh, Leslie has teh spotlight !
Sing it Leslie … sing it loud and sing it proud !
Graham is such a windbag. Why am I not surprised that he has to have the last word.
My congrats EW
What is Tennet’s role in all of this? There is no mention of him and he had to be in the middle of it all.
Who could have taken Whitehouse’s place. Leahy.
Graham “I believe in the Geneva convention” except when Yoo, Addington, Bybee etc” “made mistakes” What a fucking smug arrogant hypocrite. Will come back to “bite you” Graham
No one is buying it Graham.
Graham: People devising these techniques (that broke the law) “after 9/11 – were not criminals”.
They broke the law. But it was after 9/11 so it wasn’t criminal, just “mistakes out of fear.”
I’m upset Whitehouse left Graham the opportunity to tell all these lies!
His fear – “if we keep doing this…. we’re gonna tear this country apart.”
What about giving up the rule of law, mr, graham cracker? Will that not tear this country apart?
if they are not criminals,diabolique torturers,than open all our prisons ,and free all inmates
Apparently there must have been amnesty for all crimes after 9/11. Who knew? Where’s the EO?
Gracious Lindsey is in full-blown panic, this is borderline hysteria… Wowser, the thugs are really freakin’ scared…
Yep, from my understanding of human nature, Graham was grasping at straws with his arguments.
Whitehouse could be seen smiling at Graham’s ridiculous line of questions.
Graham fits this scenario:
Yuval Ginbar author of, Why Not Torture Terrorists?: Moral, Practical and Legal Aspects of the “Ticking Bomb” Justification for Torture, writes:
I hope the legal team at FDL can give an analysis of these hearings.
What the hell was Graham trying to do? Sounded like a cynical CYA maneuver to me but I do not understand the law well enough. I mean, I know in a practical sense it was obvious a slimey CYA operation, but what about the legal aspect.
Graham’s last statement is idiotic. Is he that stupid?
Graham is a vile scare monger, and two faced creep who needs to be countered. Graham is a danger to our national security and our maral standing in the world.
Right now, do I hate that creep Graham’s stinking guts.
Graham tells a big fat stinking lie about who is Guantamo right now.
What a vile pig.
It will come back to bite him. Da google will ensure that!
Graham was consciously throwing everything on the record, good and bad, to obfuscate and muddy the waters in an attempt to set a record that “reasonable people” could disagree over all this. Quite frankly, if you read this as a cold transcript, he probably was more successful than you think.
I agree.
sadly, it often works.
sure do not get this. I would think you would have to be schizophrenic to make sense of where Graham went with this. “I believe in the Geneva convention” except when it comes to the U.S. following International agreements. He was all over the place
His arguments or distractions were
* delusions
* hallucinations
* disorganized speech (e.g., frequent derailment or incoherence)
* grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior
* negative symptoms, i.e., affective flattening, alogia, or avolition
Yeah, I guess so. But lies are recorded in cold transcripts in black and white. So Graham lied about the nature of some of the people still in Gitmo (I think there is very good evidence that some of those people are innocent and turned in only for bounty money) and I think he lied, or mislead, about Cheney’s list of top-ten torture successes. I suspect he lied or mislead about the legal implications of differences between POWs and any kind of captive, for purposes of defining torture.
I want to know about the legal merits of Graham’s vile speech.
Graham yells, bullies, asks questions and then interrupts to answer them himself, he panders to fears that something dark and dirty needs to be done for intelligence work.
And I would dearly love to be able to excuse whatever I do, using Graham’s approach to legal analysis. That cannot be sound analysis, otherwise all one would have to do make a good pretext at fear, earnestness, and panic and one could do all sorts of things
Graham has no clue. He doesn’t even have Whitehouse to stop him from doing more damage to himself now.
Graham is a lying obfuscating sack of shit.
Can someone tell him to shut the fuck up
Graham cut off Soufan three times. Graham is terrified of the truth
graham to Soufan “I have nothing but the highest regard” for you and your service to our nation. That is why I will not let you finish a sentence or have your say. Because I have so much respect for you
Graham is a sicko
We need a Graham big fat lie and panic analysis.
This vicious squirrley little goon needs to get his smarmy little lying face slapped (figuratively) for fricking telling bald face lies to the nation.
Graham: Loon or Liar -which is it?
Looney Tunes Liar?
Marcy hope to see you on MSNBC tonight or very soon. Congrats on your award with many more to come
While I certainly disagree vehemently with Graham I thought he was a powerful advocate for his side.
News Update on MSNBC – White House to seek delay in release of prisoner photos and may appeal to Appellate Court.
I disagree. I think Graham told several outright lies, and while I am no lawyer, I sure do hope that Graham’s legal analysis applies to me. All if have to do is prove I am really scared and really earnest and I can do pretty much as I please.
I think Graham stunk.
@94 and others as well:
Graham lied. And in no time, those lies will be outed!
Did you just catch that — Luban shook Graham’s hand and tried to speak with him. Graham couldn’t even look at him and walked away.
Graham’s behavior is an example of what we will see if there is actually a truth commission. Graham was seen making some of the witnesses sound nervous.
Graham was seen biting himself in the ass
I just tried to find Whitehouse’s closing statement. I cannot find it.
MazelTov EW! Very well deserved.
I am sorry but I feel that the discussion about the effectiveness of the technique is spurious. It is wrong, it is illegal even if it was effective.
Graham is doing a fascinating soliloquy for reporters on the after hearing shot. Blah, blah, blah it was reasonable!
That’s okay. There is that saying about giving someone enough rope… His words will be noted by international courts.
I can’t believe the news that the White House is delaying the release of the prisoner photos and may even appeal the ruling to release them.
One step forward, two steps back.
It is because a picture is worth a thousand words. And in legal circles, those thousand words can go quite far.
Obama “no one is above the law”
Holder “no one is above the law”
Well do they believe this or not? Looks like NOT
If they backtrack on the photos then we may not see the IG report either. When will the cover up end!
I’m pretty pissed off that Whitehouse gave Graham the last word – he could have rescheduled his flight.
Me too. Really pissed me off that Soufan was cut off by Graham three times and Whitehouse once. Who held the room in complete silence you could hear a pin drop when Soufan was speaking. Everyone was listening intently. Graham could not have this so he just kept interrupting him.
Soufan and the others will be allowed to enter further written testimony into the record … standard procedure for hearings. The Dems – Feingold, Durbin, Feingold et al already know all they need to at this point.
Frankly, I liked Whitehouse’s touch of giving Graham the Spotlight. I hope that his closing statement ignites a fury across the blogosphere and by extension, America. With a few exceptions, the MSM will fall in behind Lindsay’s talking points.
but nothing like having the stage and all of us listening closely
this was an opportunity for all of us listening and watching to hear Soufan who was the clearest most intelligent and experienced voice in the room. Will the transcripts have as much of an effect as it would have if Soufan had said what ever it was he wanted to say then in context with all of us listening?
When
SmokeyLindsay sings, I hear Violins !Agreed, nothing like fillibustering the witness – but Whitehouse should have given time for the most compelling testimony rather than reading another witness statement into the record.
Graham being interviewed: he’s saying we just need better laws, we need to take another stab at it, mistakes were made.
He says everything all at once with no logical consistency whatsoever.
Hopefully he and his arguments will self-destruct some time soon: my ticking bomb theory.
Oh yea, thats a good “cover-up” and relaying the recycled GOP rhetoric
In a previous post – in the introduction of the witnesses – Luban stated that the rational for the memos- in NOT being inflicting pain was what the Medicare code states on that subject – pain…this is where and why they (those who wrote the memos) came to their conclusion that Torture does NOT inflict pain!! WTF!
Congratulations Marcy on the Hillman Award !!!
More to come, I’m sure.
Marcie!! I’m so pleased that you are being recognized for the sustained quality of your work. Well merited and long overdue, imho. BZ.
re: White House and the photos … we are seeing a lot of contradictory leaks (especially at the last minute) that have nothing to do with the White House lately, imho something to keep in mind.
“…we will tear this country apart…”
A country that tortures deserves to be torn apart.
agreed,children too, read Hersh
Lindsay Graham supports TORTURE…LIKE CHRIST ON THE CROSS,what would Jesus say?
we are a Xtian Nation dont forget
Need to get away from the church metaphor’s and get back to the real questions on why the law was not followed
i am pointing up their total hypocrisy,okay with you?
Yes…I understand but that is a known fact the GOP’ers keep inflicting us with this crap. The law is the law. I really don’t care which party instructed this whole fall out, if you broke the law – you go to jail.
I think one good way to strip those is to include stripping them of health care. HEHEHE
”The award-winning blogger emptywheel.” Three cheers!
MSNBC: Prez met last week with legal advisors about releasing photos. Evidently Odierno influenced the Prez by saying the photos would put a bullseye on the back of the military. Bad, bad news.
The article in WAPO states at the bottom that Sens. Lindsay Graham and Lieberman visited with Obama yesterday and argued against release of the photos…..IMO, Obama is too weak.
Forgot to add that WAPO also states that the remaining photos were from prisons other than Abu Ghraib. hmmm..just how widespread was this sadistic bestiality?
Tear whose country apart? I’m happy to tear Cheney’s corner of the country apart if that’s what must be done. What about the rest of us out here who don’t want our country to be guilty of covering up torture?
Again, it’s a class system. If you are worried about torture, too bad. If you have lies to protect and you are in the political class, well then, we can’t *even* ask any embarrassing questions. It will tear the country apart. Feh.
This argument ticks me off. They don’t believe mistakes were made, they’re still out there defending torture. They’re not saying it was wrong, they’re saying it was the right thing to do. Just ask Cheney, Harold Ford, Lindsay himself.
Harold Ford is such a lowlife … did you catch him on Tweety ?
Matthews hammered him “sounds like Cheney talk” Ford backed down and looked like a fool
I have a video of him up on my blog. The video is when he was on Morning Joe last week. He is a torture defender.
add Joe Scar
So, when they say “Let’s look forward” the response should be that we are and that these people would do it again.
Yes, and when the say, “let’s look forward,” what they really mean is: “let’s look the other way.”
America needs a day of reckoning with torture, not temporizing.
Here is a story up at WaPo about the prisoner photos
sorry, “ladies rubbing flying ointments on themselves.” so pissed i’m incandescent. i started out grad school studying torture and terror, back when it referred to what states do to people. just makes me so angry i can apply everything i learned to my own damn country.
Graham can babble all he wants … the Dems on this Committee will tear him apart in private and at follow up hearings.
Breaking News; Obama seeking to block Gitmo interrogation photos.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com
Change we can believe in. Not
Afghanistan and Iraq, not GITMO, but a good story/link – thanks.
Senator Graham should have been called out for badgering the witness, relevance and making closing arguments.
Graham is diverting the real problems like a good GOPer! Its not that torture got any information good nor bad…more that it was against the law here and internationally.
“I’m so afraid that we’re putting men and women at risk who did nothing but their best to try to defend this nation.”
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Law exists to guide those who are scared and don’t know what to do.
amen
Graham repeated lies that had been debunked in the proceedings. That makes him an intentional liar. An honest person (a ”good” person who meant well but had been wrong) would have heard the testimony today and not been able to repeat those lies (specifically about the Gitmo detainees, in particular).
He’s following Cheney’s playbook. He will only believe Cheney’s documents that Cheney wrote himself.
It’s a problem. But the truth is stronger. Eventually.
He’s following Cheney’s playbook. He will only believe Cheney’s documents that Cheney wrote himself.
———
they will all blindly follow Lord Vader to the darkside…so be it
After all Cheney’s edicts are so reliable./s Mushroom clouds, enemy on last legs, etc.
EW – congrats on the Hillman and I hope it gets it’s own topic front paged. It’s a freakin big deal.
Speaking of which, Jane has something about this on the FDL front page
The lawyers who authored the opinions are afraid to testify.
So at this point, Graham is the best they’ve got. And he sounds like Sean Hannity when he says “you’re a great American.”
Oh, and Liz Cheney is the best they’ve got too. And she associates herself with Rush Limbaugh.
Anyone know where I can find Whitehouse’s closing comments?
http://judiciary.senate.gov/he…..fm?id=3842
Thanks. I’m trying to find them transcribed. While I was at the committee page earlier, I could only find the opening remarks and submitted testimony statements transcribed as well as the webcast link.
I must be missing the transcribed closing comments.
this is where whitehouses opening statement is
http://judiciary.senate.gov/he…..it_id=6151
andrea mitchell leading her show with Soufon’s testimony but what do you want to bet that later all the coverage will focus on the torture apologists
Any thing that Mitchell says is bunk in my view…Why hasn’t anyone asked her some serious questions about her midnight conversations with hubby, A. Greenspan??? What she’s now a vital reporter? She has the knowledge to drill for the truth? What a scam she portraits
Leahy on MSNBC right now.
THE QUESTION IS: ”How would you feel if you or your partner or your child were detained and tortured?”
If they were innocent?
If they weren’t innocent?
There, let’s have those answers from Graham et. al.
And “innocent” of what? They have changed the definition of who is that “ticking time bomb” illegal enemy combatant so often and so broadly that, if you sell someone a happy meal, you better hope they’ve never visited a spoof website on making nukes by spinning a bucket over their head.
Farce.
Graham made the real argument against himself, which is that every other country treats al-Qaeda as a criminal matter – when he talks about solving the problem internationally, not just nationally, and one county’s approach is different than everyone else’s and not only that, but it shoots everyone else in the foot, hmmmmm, gosh, gee, how do you reconcile that?
Argh.
What if Cheney’s right? Frank Gaffney with David Schuster.
Robert Baer on this clip to.
I missed it Liz Cheney said “President Obama siding with terrorist” if he releases the photos.
Gaffney “thousands of photographs of people in unpleasant positions”
“unpleasant positions” Geez
the Cheney’s sure hang tight when it comes to their family traditions. LYING AND UNDERMINING OUR COUNTRY
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#30709395
147 – again, the importance of al-Libi.
We don’t have to speculate on “what if”
We know what we got with torture – al-Libi making the false claims of al-Qaeda training camps in Iraq, lies to the world and the Iraq war.
We also know that Cheney knew, since at least the CIA Aug 2002 memo, that they were setting up torture for innocent people mistakenly shipped to GITMO. We don’t need “what ifs” to answer any of that.
Cheney is taunting the jury pool! And yes taunting!
Thanks for that, you point out more outright lies and intentional misdirection in Graham’s statement.
They knew that some of those people were innocent, but thought torture would be the appropriate way to extract information. Knew they were innocent, but could not release them because they were supposed pieces of their spposed puzzle, and because of PR problems.
Those facts tear much Graham’s position to shreds. And I think Graham knows it. Graham is a damned liar, and I think he knows it.
But don’t you think it’s weird beyond anything you’ve seen historically that Cheney’s main defender is his daughter?
True that Julie Nixon Eisenhower was her father’s best defender, and always came across as sincere. But to her credit, she never, ever inserted herself into a Dept of State position overseeing the very area of the world where a US war was being fought (!). In other words, whatever you may think of Julie Nixon Eisenhower (and FWIW, I think she’s conducted her public role with dignity through the years), she never, ever took on a policy position in the State Dept when her dad was president.
For instance, Margaret Truman never presumed to take on a position at Dept of State overseeing, say… Korea.
None of the Johnson or Nixon daughters ever took on a Dept of State position overseeing any region of Southeast Asia.
Ditto Amy Carter, any of the Reagan offspring, or the Clinton daughter.
And I have zero respect for the Bush daughters, but at least they weren’t taking roles in the State Dept getting mixed up in foreign policy (!).
Yet Liz Cheney was at Dept of State overseeing the region in which a war was fought, and msnbc doesn’t even mention that when she comes on to ‘defend’ her father?!
No one even observes her own policy role(s), nor do they mention that it’s strange that Cheney can’t exactly have Scooter Libby come out to defend him and has to rely on his own daughter, and Frank Gaffney…?
These are unprecedented levels of weirdness going on here.
torture is such an ugly subject and ugly word – they know that people will have an inherent distate of calling the father a torturer to his daughter’s face. So she’s a useful foil
It’s my sense that the repubs always send out an attractive woman, if possible with long blond hair – to communicate the propaganda. It’s like advertising – make it sexy!
Sick!
ROTL, here is an interesting overview of Liz Cheney and her time at State Dept. The entire article is very revealing. Excerpt:
[emphasis mine]
I probably won’t live to see it, but you pups are going to have to deal with Liz Chaney running for president some day. Be prepared.
Soufan’s testimony is powerful tv. They will not resist. Much more interesting than Graham. Seriously.
What if Cheney’s right?
SO?
My problem with Whitehouse here was that he didn’t come out swinging (eg no mention of Constitution and Bill of Rights in opening statement, etc), had inadequate time, and, frankly, seemed ill prepared to shutdown folks like Addicot. While I support his enthusiasm and, frankly, identify with his demeanor and motivations, it seems to me that he wasn’t prepared for Addicot. Also, the fact that Leahy and Feingold didnt’ cross examine cross examine nor follow up on some of the issues that came forward.
The whole hearing had the appearance of a holding pattern setup by Leahy and, possibly, (out of respect for) Specter?
It was interesting to hear about the contractors being present at the first interrogations of Al Qaeda suspects. How did contractors get there? That’s what DiFi and Whitehouse implied would be/were being investigated by the Intelligence committee? Hard to tell…in fact, it seemed that Soufan’s testimony came as a surprise to the Senators…follow up needs to be done on who the contractor(s) were and how they got those contracts…
Meant as a reply to klynn @24:
I had to miss most of the hearings and will catch up later, but the bits that I saw of Graham were really strange in the sense that he was so fearful. Whussup with that…? He’s exhibiting such a weird fearfulness that it prompts speculation about what he’s so very afraid of… also, msnbc has a headline that Obama now will try to block release of the photos, so whoever around here predicted that (bmaz…?) wins a pony. Or maybe a troll?
I watch it all, and made the same observation. Graham is scared. After today, he should be more terrified by what impression he left on record.
Something bizarre there, IMHO.
Too much fear and far too much partisan political talk; when I watch the replay and catch up with the threads later today, I’ll keep an eye out for whether he even actually focused on the legal and military procedures issues.
Intriguing.
Leahy: We will have individual Congressional hearings but I prefer a Commission. Senator Whitehouse and I will continue to push for this. Bybee refused to come and testify. We could subpoena him (didn’t say he would).
Mitchell said when Zelikow was on 911 Commission he asked CIA to go back and interrogate detainees for more info when he knew they were being tortured. Now he is saying something else.
Leahy saying Graham using Republican talking points and strawmen. Mitchell bringing up Pelosi…Leahy said fine ask those questions about briefings but let’s not lose sight of the question why were people instructed to break the law.
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is seeking to block the immediate release of hundreds of photos showing U.S. personnel allegedly abusing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.
An Obama administration official said Wednesday that the president told his legal advisers last week that releasing the photos would endanger U.S. troops. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private.
I lean more toward the facts that are being exposed in over site committees , one needs to allow these committees to discover and convict or/and have a independent investigator convict those who are/or involved in this whole debacle. The photos will surface and be exposed – however, lets focus on the legal issues for now and accountability.
OK by me
Hoping “immediate” is the key word here. Not memorial day weekend but the next week. Otherwise Obama joins the ranks of hypocrites
At least Graham and Addicott have sold one person.
Obama is going to revive military commissions.
Apparently John McCain and Graham have pointed out to noviceboy that he has “dug [himself] a deep hole] but they, wise ol military gurus that they are, are going to be bipartisan and help him out of it by insuring military commissions.
Actually, I agree with this from McCain:
Obama had plenty of time while he was a Senator and while running to have people dig in and address this, but all he wanted was the political soundbyte that he had “done something” right away, in his first 100 days.
What he still hasn’t done? Explained to the American public how many innocent people have suffered and how many Americans have died bc of the old torture regime and its need for a location it thought would be outside the reach of the law.
Let’s face it, as Graham and Addicott both know, if people were confident that they were following the rules of law, the GITMO detainees wouldn’t ever have been at GITMO, like the Nazis and others, they would have been at either onsite battlefield locations or shipped to US bases for holding.
The whole reason for GTIMO was a deliberate and delibertative decision to try to create something outside the reach of the law. Again, not the act of scared, fearful and frightened persons, but a deliberate calculation of “how can I have the best chance of getting away with the crimes I’m going to commit”
I like that las paragraph. According to Graham, if you create a nice pretext, you have no accountability at all. You cannot even be tried and no facts can be established in court to determine whether the lawbreaking had any extenuating circumstances. That is very nice lawyering.
So, excuse me, I am going to take somebody else’s money now, because I really do earnestly think it is mine, and I am very worried about my situation. Good old “Liar” Lindsay Graham will fix it all up for me.
There ya go. Criminal intent.
Mary @ 155: Exactly.
Graham said ALL the Gitmo people are dangerous when Senator Durbin stated earlier for the record that some detainees had been determined to be innocent and ordered released over a year ago. But they have been detained and probably tortured and they are still there. Graham wants perpetual detention … but not in the Homeland.
What standard would we apply for ourselves? What standard would Senator Graham want applied for HIM? HUH? THAT’s a fair standard ~ let him tell us that white southern Senators and their families should be treated differently. I’d like to hear that.
We set it up so people would be detained for bounty! We didn’t bother to make sure they deserved to be detained and then we stripped all the legal and treaty protections. I swear all these fuckers are sociopaths.
.
Dang – usually it’s bmaz, but this time it’s you. I wish I had that gift to reduce and simplify.
Bounties. Thanks for that refutation. Graham is a cracker full of lies!
171 – Graham is just basically walking out prettied up lies, because he can. He really wanted to get by with the Kirakou 35 seconds and he broke lie, but he is a good lawyer from a technique standpoint. When that bit him, he immediately went on to something else and didn’t bat an eye.
Thanks for that too -the 35 seconds lie, for which the only testimony is from somebody who was not there, and by my understanding no longer in the system at all. Another lie. Graham was spouting them so fast and furious it was confusing.
That’s because he is confused!
If Obama hadn’t moved to close Gitmo we’d say he was waffling like on gay rights. Sometimes you just have to put a stake in the ground and start somewhere.
I’m not going to believe anything Graham says about his meetings with the President. Nor McCain. The idea of restarting the Military Comissions is what the GOP wants; this is another leak and does not represent what Obama is thinking.
Liz Cheney: wierdness indeed, it’s only because the MSN is GOP that she gets any hearing.
It’s too late to stop the photos. Obama knows that, I’m sure. They have lost in court twice. So, they’ll lose a third time. I don’t believe the troops are in any greater danger from this release than from anything else that has happened in the last 8 years. And again, unnamed sources are leaking this p.o.v.
I recall Obama saying: one of the things about being President is on many problems there is no good solution … only a series of bad and less bad options.
Somebody should have thought of some of these consequences a few years ago.
Have you heard whether Obama is going to facilitate a Health Care meeting ?
I’d love for him to do so, if only to get Repug Congresscritters in front of a Mike saying that Americans do not need affordable Health Care.
maybe if they are released, the Whitehouse will instruct the DOJ to black out the obvious! just like when documents are blacked out!?
And, gee, if those photos are released, it will be the end of the ”few bad apples” defense. Shucks. No wonder they are fighting it. That’s the ”danger” to the troops. They might get some exoneration.
hey, Petro: no, I haven’t been following things closely lately … it’s pretty crazy what with the US media using the Canadian capitalist doctor who says we’re all lined up dying in the streets here waiting for treatment. Unless we’re paying him to save our lives, of course. What a freaking mess.
We have “experts” in every part of the country, advocating for a U.S. type health care system … and no one is doing Drug testing on them as yet …
oh you mean the commercials that the swiftboaters are using? If so, this same guy was convicted of fraud back in the 1990’s with fraud billing of Medicare in the tune of $1-BILLION. I hope some group comes up with a counter commercial/add to this.
Mary @ 172: thanks. took me years to learn how to do that.
Health care is the one thing that would keep me from moving stateside. Not that I’m a big fan of conventional medicine. Fought my chronic wars there and I have retreated from the battlegroud. But, given that I’d be bankrupt trying to have health care just in case in the states. And I wouldn’t use it … shocks my logic. No can do. And the frustration and anxiety of claims would probably kill me. It’s crazy!
yup, 1oldlady, they are using that guy AND a Canadian doctor who charges rich people for services in Canada. Canadian doctor says everyone in Canada is dying waiting in lines for treatment. It’s not true. AND IF IT WERE TRUE, what’s the difference between THAT and being refused coverage for pre-existing conditions???? No difference. Sounds like what he’s warning about is exactly what some people are facing in the states!
Torture is a WAR CRIME. Anyone authorizing it, doing it, or refusing to prosecute it is a WAR CRIMINAL.
Graham and Torquemada seem to have a lot of ideas about torture in common with each other.
Is it some sort of secret who these contractors were? How come nobody is asking who was torturing in our name? I know that Israeli interrogators were being used in Iraq so why not right after 9/11 in GITMO?
I find it very funny that Graham brings up the issue of recidivism of detainees when our treatment of them was probably the main reason why they hate us and took to the fight. If they were innocent going into GITMO, they sure as hell won’t be too happy when they are released.
The Bush administration’s policies created many more terrorists than we killed or converted.
Was it just me or did you also see Lindsey Graham’s nylons wrapped too tightly around his testicles today? What an asshole that guy is! He defends torture, you know, the torture that shut down the prisoners, but refuses to accept that the valuable information received way before the torture happened!
Spit. I hate this woman Senator. He needs to be fired.
With 5 bullets to the head, WE TORTURED ABU AFTER HE GAVE THE INFORMATION. Just having 5 bullets to the head is torture for crying out loud, but yet, it made sense to torture the guy anyway? INFURIATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!