Bush Junta Lied About War Crimes to The World, the Courts, ALL Except Pelosi - That's LOL Moranic

[L. Coyote]

I think I found THE way of summing up the torture revelations.

It really is this simple. Bush has been lying, lying, and lying some more. He lied to the American People, to the World, denying the USA tortures and his war crimes.
The Junta has been busy lying too, to the courts about torture and about the evidence of the war crime, about the existence of video tapes of waterboarding.

What are the legal consequences of the perjury to the courts and the obstruction of justice. These revelations may overturn the cases against Zacarias Moussaui and Jose Padilla, not a small consequence, and the repercussions just spread from there to all cases where interrogations occurred.

So, Bush's lies were covering up perjury and obstruction of justice, and evidence of torture and war crimes. What else? The evidence was also sought by the 9/11 Commission. No doubt there is more to come still. Major players like Harriet Meirs were involved.

That is a brief summary of the import of what this newest scandal entails. Very serious and numerous crimes leading right to the President of the United States, and very impeachable crimes at that.

NOW, who would like to claim that, with all this lying going on, someone was running over to Capital Hill to fully inform Dem leaders about all this impeachable criminality? Come on, step right up and claim this moranic distinct. Own this idea! Anyone? Oh, come on. WA Post? Anyone at all?

I just transcends all reason to think that the Bush Junta, like faithful Catholics, were confessing their crimes against humanity to Dem leaders, admitting their perjury, obstruction of justice, war crimes, admitting all the lying, admitting impeachable offenses to Pelosi, Harman, Rockefeller.

Anyone falling for this scenario truly, truly deserves the distinction of being called a moran. :rofl:

[Mojorabbit]

1. Well then feel free

to call me a moran. I don't hero worship any politician. I can count on my fingers a few who I have faith in. I will reserve judgement till all the info comes out.

[frogcycle]

2. here is their briefing about enhanced interrogation:

"Well, you see, Congresswoman, sometimes they don't want to answer our questions, so we treat them impolitely to see if they will talk. We make them uncomfortable by doing things like pouring water on their heads."

[L. Coyote]

3. Oh yeah, I left out the crime of "Obstruction of Congress"

[L. Coyote]

33. White House Finally Issues Preservation Order, Days After Destruction Of Torture Tapes Revealed

White House Finally Issues Preservation Order, Days After Destruction Of Torture Tapes Revealed
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/10/wh-prservation-order-tapes/


After the media revealed last Thursday evening that the CIA had destroyed at least two torture tapes, both the White House and the Department of Justice delayed in sending out a preservation order ensuring that federal government employees did not undertake any further acts of destroying evidence.

Lawyers from the Center for Constitutional Rights representing Guantanamo Bay detainee Majid Khan warned in a Nov. 29 filing that, “absent a preservation order, there is substantial risk that the torture evidence will disappear.”

On Friday’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Georgetown Law professor Neal Katyal — who successfully argued the Hamdan decision in front of the Supreme Court — expressed concern that further documents might be destroyed because the administration was delaying the issuance of a preservation order:

I am a little dismayed that hasn’t done what I believe Attorney General Ed Meese did right when the Iran contra scandal broke, which was issue a preservation order — ordering all federal government employees to make sure no further documents were destroyed. Because who knows what’s being shredded right now as we speak.

Watch it:

..............

[L. Coyote]

4. MUST READ: What Difference Would It Make? BY Scott Horton

What Difference Would It Make?
BY Scott Horton - Dec 10, 2007 - http://harpers.org/archive/2007/12/hbc-90001892

The Department of Justice and the CIA are undertaking a “preliminary investigation” to determine whether a more formal probe of the destruction of the two tapes is appropriate. The effort on the Justice side is entrusted to Kenneth L. Wainstein, the assistant attorney general responsible for counterterrorism efforts, who is coordinating with the CIA’s Inspector General, John L. Helgerson, on the probe.

The major issues that need to addressed are internal to the CIA and the Justice Department. Both made false official statements to a federal court in Virginia as well as to the American public. The question is how deep the deception ran, who masterminded it, and what purposes it served. And neither the public nor Congress should accept an answer from Mr. Wainstein or Mr. Helgerson, because both are far too close to the issues which need to be scrutinized. As Senator Biden already noted, this is a matter which can only be managed by a special prosecutor appointed by Attorney General Mukasey.

Justice Department lawyers involved in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui have been very quick to insist that the disclosures are “irrelevant” because Moussaoui pleaded guilty. The Justice Department lawyers handling these cases have a long track record of hyperventilation and lack of candor dealing with the courts and the public. .........

[L. Coyote]

41. BUSH: ‘Haven’t Seen It; We Don’t Torture’

‘Haven’t Seen It; We Don’t Torture’
BY Scott Horton - August 9, 2007 - http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000815


President Bush is the most enthusiastic vacationer of any American president. He has racked up some 430 vacation days since coming to office. And today he starts his five-week summer vacation for 2007. But wait, we’re not supposed to call it a “vacation.” The Bush minders are very particular about that.

Perhaps to keep people off the vacation, Bush gave a press conference .... there was, from my perspective, one compelling question put to him, and one answer. The question was premised on Jane Mayer’s authoritative report on the current CIA torture program published in the current New Yorker. Here it is:

"One of the sources said that the Red Cross described the agency’s detention and interrogation methods as tantamount to torture, and declared that American officials responsible for the abusive treatment could have committed serious crimes. The source said the report warned that these officials may have committed “grave breaches” of the Geneva Conventions, and may have violated the U.S. Torture Act, which Congress passed in 1994. The conclusions of the Red Cross, which is known for its credibility and caution, could have potentially devastating legal ramifications."

And here’s the totality of the Bush answer:

Haven’t seen it; we don’t torture.

Just a few of the things we don’t do. Except that they have been repeatedly documented in Bagram, Abu Ghraib, Camp Cropper, Guantanamo and other facilities run by the CIA around the world. And they have apparently been approved by a recent Executive Order issued by George Bush.

...............

[KittyWampus]

5. Many DU'er have their little scripts. Anything that reinforces that, even if it's bullshit from Rove

Cheney (whoever is dishing it out today) will be accepted blindly, without question.

Even though they are actually enabling the traitors, DU'ers will stick to their script.

It helps prove how liberal you are, at least to other DU'ers.

[L. Coyote]

6. MUST SEE: 'The Suggestion the President is not Involved is Ridiculous'

Hissyspit posted a KO with J. Turley on DU videos.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x75250

[Occam Bandage]

7. Of course. The Pelosi-bashers here obviously didn't think this one through.

Bush: "Hey, Nancy. For no good reason whatosever, I am going to give you detailed descriptions of some crimes I'm planning on committing. Now, I know I've already lied to you (and everyone else) about everything I've done since I've taken office, but I've had a change of heart. These are really big crimes, and you could probably ruin my Presidency by announcing them. So anyway, here's the list of crimes I'm committing."

Pelosi: "Oh, sure, George. Of course I wouldn't use this list for political gain; I have no interest in becoming Speaker of the House. Thank you for informing me truthfully and honestly about all of your illegal actions in this specific regard."

Bush: "No problem. Oh, be sure not to tell anyone about this. That way, if it ever comes out, you can fall on your sword for me. Please don't tell anyone, though, because if you do, I'll probably lose re-election."

Pelosi: "Of course. I will happily incur the wrath of my base for no good reason. Thank you for informing me of this for no good reason. We are insane and consistently act without motivation!"

Bush: "That is certainly the case. Let us hit ourselves in the head with croquet mallets!"

Pelosi: "How painful! Let's keep doing it!"

[L. Coyote]

10. Tom Tomorrow's job has never been in this much jeopardy. LOL . Cartoon this, PLEEEZE

[L. Coyote]

28. It is important to remember, if Bush and Cheney resign, Pelosi becomes President.

Thinking this through, that is certainly one thing to consider when we see these directed assault on her.

[Blashyrkh]

8. I wanna know why...

...you can't call an individual a moran, but you're free to paint an entire group collectively as "morans" and nothing happens.

"3. Civility: Treat other members with respect. Do not post personal attacks against other members of this discussion forum."

I guess I missed the part where it's fine to do it en masse.

[Occam Bandage]

9. That part would be entitled GD:P, as best I can gather.

[L. Coyote]

11. Did I miss something? Did "an entire group" claim the scenario? Coool! Who?

[Blashyrkh]

12. That doesn't even make sense.

If you straight up called everyone who has argued against Pelosi today, an fullblown idiot; you would be banned.

But since you've creatively worded it, and refrained from calling anyone out individually, you're free to malign an entire group of people. Simply because they don't agree with you. Fairly obvious inspiration for posting a personal rant on why you believe everyone who disagrees with you is a fool.

[L. Coyote]

13. What I wrote was one thing. I do not claim your inferences.

I wrote:

"the Bush Junta, like faithful Catholics, were confessing their crimes against humanity to Dem leaders, admitting their perjury, obstruction of justice, war crimes, admitting all the lying, admitting impeachable offenses to Pelosi, Harman, Rockefeller.

Anyone falling for this scenario truly, truly deserves the distinction of being called a moran. :rofl:

Are you saying that there are DUers who believe this scenario? If so, who?

[Blashyrkh]

47. I don't buy the premise that they were "confessing" anything.

I don't think anyone does. A confession implies guilt. They're called "briefings" when it's an emotionless exchange of information. You've framed the queston in such a way that you would have to be a simpleton to believe it as written. Using the word confession just loads the statement to the point of inanity, particularly considering this administration.

Subtle, but flamebait all the same.

[L. Coyote]

14. CIA coverups and American injustice

CIA coverups and American injustice
How the Bush administration's policies in the war on terror are coming back to haunt us.
By Hina Shamsi - Dec. 11, 2007 - GUANTÁNAMO BAY, Cuba


The news last week that the CIA had destroyed interrogation videotapes of two prisoners in its secret detention program had particular resonance at Guantánamo Bay, where I was attending a U.S. military tribunal hearing as a human rights observer. The destroyed tapes reportedly were evidence of the CIA's brutal treatment, in secret prisons abroad, of two alleged high-level al-Qaida operatives, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nahsiri. Both men are now in U.S. military custody in Guantánamo, together with 13 other former CIA prisoners the government refers to as "high-value detainees."

Evidence from three of the other "high-value detainees" was a key issue in the hearing I attended, and showed how the Bush administration's authorization of illegal detention and brutal prisoner treatment has tainted all aspects of its existing framework for handling key terrorist suspects. With the administration's stubborn refusal to return to the rule of law, how can it be surprising that, in Washington, D.C., the CIA's likely crimes have led to a coverup?

More light may be shed on the CIA's destruction of evidence in the coming weeks, with congressional committees pursuing investigations. A test of new Attorney General Michael Mukasey's leadership will be whether he appoints an investigator into the CIA's wrongdoing who is independent of the Department of Justice. .....

......

[L. Coyote]

15. SALON: For the CIA's eyes only

For the CIA's eyes only
Was the agency's destruction of two video recordings of harsh interrogations by the CIA a coverup?
By Mark Benjamin - Dec 8, 2007 - WASHINGTON -- http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/12/08/cia_tapes/index.html


CIA director Michael Hayden said in a statement to employees on Thursday that the agency was seeking to protect its own by destroying at least two videotapes depicting the brutal interrogations of suspected terrorists. If the tapes became public, Hayden warned, it could expose the identities of interrogators employed by the agency. The tapes were recorded in 2002, but Hayden said the agency decided to destroy them in 2005 because the footage could expose the interrogators and their families to "retaliation from al-Qaida and its sympathizers."

By 2005, the Abu Ghraib scandal in Iraq the previous year had brought intense scrutiny to interrogation practices under the Bush administration. Indeed, says Duke law professor Scott Silliman, another explanation for the destruction of the 2002 interrogation tapes, three years after they were made, is that the videos depicted illegal interrogations and the CIA was trying to bury the shocking evidence. "Was this an attempt to cover up actions which at the time CIA interrogators believed they could not do?" asked Silliman, who specializes in national security issues. Silliman said the tapes may have shown agency operatives "pushing the envelope," though what was on the tapes remains unknown.

When the tapes were destroyed in 2005, Congress had not yet addressed the legal loopholes used by the Bush administration to get around the torture prohibitions of the Geneva Conventions. "The legal environment then was no protection," Silliman explained. That's because Congress had not yet passed the 2006 Military Commissions Act, which narrows the definition of a violation of the Geneva Conventions, but also provides some legal indemnity for activities prior to the legislation's becoming law.

The agency might have had reason for concern. The destroyed tapes included a recording of the early 2002 interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, the first detainee known to have been held by the CIA in the war on terror. Zubaydah was the unfortunate guinea pig when the CIA jump-started its brutal interrogation program soon after 9/11. The video of Zubaydah's interrogation might have shed further light on whether the United States has violated the Geneva Conventions ..............

..........

[L. Coyote]

16. Sen. Levin's investigation: The CIA's torture teachers

The CIA's torture teachers
Psychologists helped the CIA exploit a secret military program to develop brutal interrogation tactics -- likely with the approval of the Bush White House.
By Mark Benjamin - June 21, 2007 - WASHINGTON - http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/06/21/cia_sere/index.html


There is growing evidence of high-level coordination between the Central Intelligence Agency and the U.S. military in developing abusive interrogation techniques used on terrorist suspects. After the Sept. 11 attacks, both turned to a small cadre of psychologists linked to the military's secretive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape program to "reverse-engineer" techniques originally designed to train U.S. soldiers to resist torture if captured, by exposing them to brutal treatment. The military's use of SERE training for interrogations in the war on terror was revealed in detail in a recently declassified report. But the CIA's use of such tactics -- working in close coordination with the military -- until now has remained largely unknown.

According to congressional sources and mental healthcare professionals knowledgeable about the secret program who spoke with Salon, two CIA-employed psychologists, James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, were at the center of the program, which likely violated the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners. The two are currently under investigation: Salon has learned that Daniel Dell'Orto, the principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Defense, sent a "document preservation" order on May 15 to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other top Pentagon officials forbidding the destruction of any document mentioning Mitchell and Jessen or their psychological consulting firm, Mitchell, Jessen and Associates, based in Spokane, Wash. Dell'Orto's order was in response to a May 1 request from Sen. Carl Levin, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who is investigating the abuse of prisoners in U.S. custody.

.............

[L. Coyote]

30. The Destroyed CIA Torture Tapes & Psychologists = Democracy Now! interview with Katherine Eban

December 10, 2007 - Listen/Watch/Download
The Destroyed CIA Torture Tapes & Psychologists
http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2007/12/10/the_destroyed_cia_torture_tapes_psychologists


Is the CIA covering up the role of psychologists in torture at secret CIA prisons? Last week CIA Director Michael Hayden defended the Agency’s decision to destroy two videotapes of interrogations saying they posed a “serious security risk.” He said that if they were to become public they would have exposed C.I.A. officials and their families to "retaliation from Al Qaeda and its sympathizers.”

Two individuals involved in the interrogation of Al Qaida operative Abu Zubaydah have been identified by name – both are psychologists.

Earlier this year Vanity Fair’s Katherine Eban reported on Democracy Now! that CIA-contracted psychologist James Elmer Mitchell and Dr. R. Scott Shumate, the chief psychologist for the CIA’s counterterrorism center were at Zubaydah’s interrogation. .......

Katherine Eban:

“The CIA interrogation team arrived with James Mitchell it tow and said, ’Now, everything is going to change. We’re going to get him to say everything he knows, and we’re going to use these coercive techniques. And, according to my sources, there was even a coffin present at the interrogation they were going to use to bury Zubaydah alive.”

Eban also discussed the central role of two CIA-contracted psychologists, James Elmer Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, in designing torture tactics ............

[L. Coyote]

35. Did CIA Destroy Tapes Showing Waterboarding and Involvement of Psychologists in Torture?

December 10, 2007 - Real Video Stream - Real Audio Stream
Did CIA Destroy Tapes Showing Waterboarding and Involvement of Psychologists in Torture?
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/12/10/did_cia_destroy_tapes_showing_waterboarding

Guests:

Mark Benjamin, National Correspondent for Salon.com.

Scott Horton, New York attorney specializing in international law and human rights. He is a contributor to Harper’s Magazine where he writes the blog No Comment. He served as chair of the International Law Committee at the New York Bar Association.

AMY GOODMAN: The Justice Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have launched a joint probe into the CIA’s destruction of at least two tapes documenting prisoner interrogations at a secret CIA prison. CIA Director Michael Hayden said the tapes were destroyed because they posed a “serious security risk.” Hayden says if they were to become public they would have exposed CIA officials and their families to "retaliation from Al Qaeda and its sympathizers.” But critics have accused the CIA of deliberately destroying evidence that could have been used to hold agents accountable for the torture of prisoners.

One of the tapes is believed to have shown CIA agents waterboarding ................

[IsItJustMe]

17. Thank you for your post. I find a lot of this Palosi bashing irrational at best, and just plain

damn stupid at worst. Off the deep end, if ya know what I mean.

[L. Coyote]

42. Pelosi bashing seems like a concerted campaign with several possible objectives

Putting aside how many people have been drawn into this Rovian echo chamber, it seems that the Pelosi smear campaign has several goals. Firstly to smear Pelosi, second to divide the majority, and third, in preparation for Bush and Cheney resigning/impeachment, to weaken President Pelosi's support.

What amazes me is the degree of participation and lack of insight by those on Pelosi's left. It is as if they do not see they are carrying water for a Rovian effort. The WA Post hit piece I understand. Why people fall for it, especially when so obvious and transparent, is what I find irrational. The moles have done excellent work training the left to bash the liberal center for them.

[L. Coyote]

18. Torture begins at the top "substantiated stories of cruelty, sadism and lawlessness are stunning"

Torture begins at the top
A recently disclosed FBI memo indicates that "marching orders" to abandon traditional interrogation methods came from Defense Secretary Rumsfeld himself.
By Joe Conason - Dec 17, 2004 - http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/conason/2004/12/17/memo/index.html


Renewed exposure of prisoner abuse, torture and even murder by American military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan is widening already deep divisions between the Pentagon and the intelligence community -- and creating an untenable situation for Donald Rumsfeld, the beleaguered secretary of defense. A recently disclosed FBI memo indicates that "marching orders" to abandon traditional interrogation methods came from the defense secretary himself.

In recent days, a coalition of human rights groups led by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights has brought new cases of abuse to public attention. Using the Freedom of Information Act, they have pried thousands of pages of previously secret documents from the Defense Department and other agencies.

Even after the shock of Abu Ghraib, these substantiated stories of cruelty, sadism and lawlessness are stunning. Files from the Navy's Criminal Investigative Service describe how U.S. Marines ordered four Iraqi teenagers to kneel while a gun was "discharged to conduct a mock execution"; how they inflicted severe burns on a detainee's hands with flaming alcohol; and how they tortured another detainee with an electric transformer, making him "dance." In June, a Navy investigator revealed in an e-mail that his caseload of "high visibility" cases of abuse was "exploding." .............

[babylonsister]

19. Give me a break; you don't think there was knowledge shared

in private meetings that weren't for public consumption? Ask Rockfeller and Harman, but don't ask Pelosi, because she's too truthful? I think you're delusional if you think we all know the truth.

And why are you so intent on proving them right if they're wrong? Did you ever think of that?

[L. Coyote]

20. Federal agents seek to conceal their behavior in obtaining confessions

Glenn Greenwald - Mar 20, 2007
Federal agents seek to conceal their behavior in obtaining confessions
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/20/doj_recordings/index.html


The documents disclosed by the DOJ shed very interesting light not only on the process by which the U.S. attorneys were fired, but also on the related conduct of federal law enforcement agencies. One of the claims made by the DOJ as to why it fired Arizona U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton is that Charlton wanted to institute a policy of requiring law enforcement agents to tape record or videotape interrogations and confessions of criminal suspects -- a request which the DOJ refused and, shortly thereafter, fired him.

The documents disclosed by the DOJ with regard to this issue -- here, here, and here (.pdf) -- shed very interesting light on why the DOJ, and the various law enforcement agencies (led by the FBI and the ATF) vehemently oppose having their interrogations recorded.

In March, 2006, Charlton sent a letter to Alberto Gonzales' Deputy, Paul McNulty, requesting permission to create a "pilot program" whereby federal law enforcement agencies would be required to tape record interrogations of suspects. This is part of what he wrote:

................

But this is how our federal government operates now. This whole argument over recordings reflects the prevailing mentality. They engage in conduct that they know is improper and that Americans would find repellent. But their reaction to that knowledge is to figure out how to best conceal what they are doing. That is the argument made by every federal law enforcement agency, and the DOJ, as to why they do not want their behavior recorded. So they continue to engage in all sorts of surveillance and recording of American citizens, yet fight vigorously to ensure that their own conduct is never chronicled.

[mzmolly]

21. Well you do have a point.

:hi: K and R.

[L. Coyote]

26. Thanks. Today, Human Rights Day, is a good one to give this some reality context.

Human Rights Day marks the day the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed in 1948.

[L. Coyote]

22. ACLU Calls for Independent Prosecutor to Investigate Destruction of CIA Interrogation Tapes

ACLU Calls for Independent Prosecutor to Investigate Destruction of CIA Interrogation Tapes (12/7/2007)
Says Possible Cover-Up of Potential Criminal Activity Needs to Be Examined
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/33044prs20071207.html


WASHINGTON - With the news yesterday that the Central Intelligence Agency destroyed at least two videotapes documenting the brutal interrogations of al-Qaeda suspects, the American Civil Liberties Union calls on Attorney General Mukasey to appoint an independent counsel to investigate, and if appropriate, prosecute any potential criminal activity. One of the tapes, made in 2002, purportedly shows the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, who U.S. officials have acknowledged was subjected to waterboarding. The CIA destroyed the tapes in November 2005.

"The CIA’s destruction of these tapes shows complete disdain for the rule of law. This reeks of a deliberate cover up of potential criminal activity by the CIA, and the videos could have shown once and for all that the CIA does indeed torture," said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU.

The CIA reportedly withheld knowledge of the tapes’ existence from federal prosecutors and the 9/11 Commission, both of which specifically asked for depictions of interrogations. The government also failed to produce the tapes as part of an ACLU Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in which a federal judge ordered the release of any documentation pertaining to treatment of detainees in U.S. custody. ACLU lawyers are considering appropriate next steps in that ongoing litigation. ........

"For what reason would the CIA destroy these videotapes other than to cover up criminal acts committed during the brutal interrogations depicted on these tapes?" asked Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The failure to turn over these tapes raises the kind of questions that only an independent prosecutor can investigate."

In June 2004, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft sent 21 referrals of possible violations of federal anti-torture laws by civilian interrogators to the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. To date, the Justice Department has not brought any indictments based on these referrals.

................

[L. Coyote]

27. DEMAND A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR = Sign the petition by filling out your information below.

DEMAND A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR

Mr. Attorney General:

The deliberate destruction of tapes showing "harsh interrogation techniques" by the C.I.A. suggests an utter disregard for the rule of law. These tapes were needed for Congress, courts, and even the 9/11 commission to do their work.

Because the Justice Department and top officials in the White House and the C.I.A. have been major players in the torture scandal, only an independent prosecutor can get at the truth.

I demand that you immediately appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute crimes that may have been committed by C.I.A. personnel or other top officials.

1.
Sign the petition by filling out your information below. ............

https://secure.aclu.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=cia_petition

C.I.A. TAPE COVERUP:
SIGN THE PETITION NOW

Last week, the head of the C.I.A., Michael Hayden, announced the agency destroyed tapes of what he called a “harsh interrogation” and what you and I would call torture. The reason? To protect agency operatives from legal consequences.

Thankfully members of Congress are already expressing their outrage over this action. On the Senate floor, Senator Kennedy warned his colleagues, “We haven’t seen anything like this since the 18 and a half minute gap on the tapes of Richard Nixon.”

This is a cover-up of epic proportions.

There is only one response: Attorney General Mukasey must respond to calls for an investigation and immediately appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate crimes that may have been committed by the C.I.A.

We’ll deliver our petition to Attorney General Mukasey and we’ll also copy members of Congress. Congress can keep the pressure on and pass a law appointing a special prosecutor if Mr. Mukasey won’t do his job.

[Mythsaje]

23. I've said my piece.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2442135&mesg_id=2442135

[babylonsister]

24. Your love of Pelosi is not shared, I fear, but bon chance with that.

And yes, I'll be here when you wake up.

[bleever]

25. Kill Piggy.

That will absolve our bestial crimes.

Blaming the weakest participants is "Lord of the Flies" caliber damage control.

K&R.

[L. Coyote]

29. NY TIMES broke this story. Now, the letters to the editor

Destroyed: The C.I.A. Torture Tapes
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/opinion/l11cia.html?ref=opinion

Re “C.I.A. Destroyed 2 Tapes Showing Interrogations” (front page, Dec. 7):

You don’t need to have worked as an F.B.I. agent for 24 years as I did to know that shredding the evidence is always a clue.

What’s the common thread underlying the C.I.A.’s destruction of videotaped harsh interrogations in the midst of ongoing legal inquiries; President Bush’s last-minute commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence; the millions of White House e-mail records missing in violation of the Presidential Records Act; and the administration’s current push to give immunity to the telecommunication companies suspected of engaging in illegal eavesdropping and surveillance of Americans?

Clearly, the only way the Bush gang can protect itself now from accountability is to suppress the truth. To do so, officials must destroy hard evidence and, at the same time, protect and immunize those who followed their illegal orders.

Their contempt for the rule of law cannot get much worse. They learned from Nixon’s Watergate, and they’re trying not to leave any Oval Office tapes around.

Coleen Rowley

....... More letters follow .........

[L. Coyote]

31. Ifs and Buts = If the CIA hadn't destroyed those tapes, what would be different?

Ifs and Buts = If the CIA hadn't destroyed those tapes, what would be different?
By Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick - Dec. 10, 2007 - http://www.slate.com/id/2179607/


In the uproar over the destruction by the CIA of taped interrogations of suspected al-Qaida operatives in the aftermath of Sept. 11, we are discovering creative new ways to speculate about past events. The pastime has begun with what should have been done differently—finger-pointing at congressional Democrats who'd been briefed about the tapes and remained silent, or distress over the failure to inform superiors at the CIA or the Bush administration. But here's a different thought experiment: How would the national debate over torture have changed if we'd known about the CIA tapes all along? How would our big terror trials and Supreme Court cases have played out?

Yes, this is also a speculative enterprise, but it's critical to understanding the extent of the CIA's wrongdoing here. And we have a benchmark. When the photos from Abu Ghraib were leaked in 2004, a national uproar ensued. Video of hours of repetitive torture could have had a similarly significant impact—the truism about the power of images holds. If we are right about that—and we think we are—this evidence that has been destroyed would have fundamentally changed the legal and policy backdrop for the war on terror in ways we've only begun to figure out.

A timeline is instructive, so here's a detailed one. http://www.slate.com/id/2179607/sidebar/2179658/

..............

[L. Coyote]

32. Destruction of CIA tapes raises bipartisan concerns

Destruction of CIA tapes raises bipartisan concerns
Democrats and Republicans talk about possible obstruction of justice charges. Biden calls for a special prosecutor.
By Faye Fiore and Chuck Neubauer, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
WASHINGTON -- December 10, 2007 - http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-interrogate10dec10,1,4429210.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true


Senators from both parties suggested Sunday that the CIA's destruction of videotaped interrogations of two suspected Al Qaeda terrorists could constitute obstruction of justice, carried out as the spy agency's methods were coming under fierce legal scrutiny.

"Burning tapes, destroying evidence -- I don't know how deep this goes. Could there be obstruction of justice? Yes," Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and a frequent critic of Bush administration foreign policy, said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

..........

"It appears as though there may be an obstruction of justice charge here -- tampering with evidence and destroying evidence," Biden told ABC's "This Week." "The easiest, straightest thing to do is to take it out of the political realm, appoint a special prosecutor and let them decide and call -- call it where it is. Is there a criminal violation? If there is, proceed. If not, don't."

In calling for a special counsel, Biden questioned whether Mukasey was suited to oversee the Justice Department investigation, given his ambivalence during his confirmation hearing over what constitutes torture.

...........

"I think this leads right into the White House," Biden said. "There may be a legal and rational explanation, but I don't see any on the face of it."

Hagel said it defied logic that senior White House officials would not have been informed of the CIA's intention to destroy the tapes. If they were not, he said, it would indicate "gross malfeasance and incompetency."

"It's hard for me to believe that senior members of the White House somehow didn't pay attention to this or didn't know about it," Hagel said. "Maybe they're so incompetent" that they missed it.

.............

[Usrename]

34. The president ate a baby.

Pelosi: It was a terrorist baby, it was his duty to eat it.

[L. Coyote]

36. Human Rights Day 10 Dec 2007 - Pakistani detainee alleges CIA tortured him

Pakistani detainee alleges CIA tortured him
10 Dec 2007 - http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/156029.html


Islamabad, Dec 10 - As a row over the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) torture tapes destroyed by it heats up, a Pakistani detainee has claimed that he was subjected to 'state-sanctioned torture'.

Majid Khan, who lived in Baltimore, Maryland, claimed through his lawyers that he was subjected to an aggressive CIA detention and interrogation programme that he said was notable for 'elaborate planning and ruthless ... torture', the Dawn newspaper reported Monday.

Khan and other high-value detainees are now being held in a previously undisclosed area of the Guantanamo prison in Cuba he called Camp 7.

................

[L. Coyote]

37. CIA Tape Scandal: News Outlets Struggle With Word 'Torture'

Do a Google search for 'CIA torture tapes,' and check out the headlines in the foreign press. Compare that to the propaganda in the USA!

==============
CIA Tape Scandal: News Outlets Struggle With Word 'Torture'
By Greg Mitchell - Dec 08, 2007 - http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003682997


NEW YORK As the protests surrounding revelations that the CIA had destroyed tapes that showed brutal interrogations by its agents, most new outlets refused to brand what the tapes likely showed as "torture."

One Associated Press article referred simply to "interrogation" on the tapes, at one point putting "enhanced interrogation" in quotes. Another AP article called it "harsh interrogation."

Mark Mazzeti in The New York Times used "severe interrogation methods." Eric Lichtblau in the same paper chose the same phrase. David Johnston, in a Saturday article for paper's Web site, referred to "aggressive interrogations" and "coercive techniques." Reuters, in its lead, relied on "severe interrogation techniques."

Dan Eggen and Joby Warrick in The Washington Post on Saturday opted for "harsh interrogation tactics." They mentioned one detainee having been "identified by intelligence officials as one of three detainees subjected to waterboarding," which they refer to not as torture but as "an aggressive interrogation technique that simulates drowning."

...........

[L. Coyote]

38. The Torture Litmus Test = "They wanted Mukasey to pledge that he would toe the Administration’s line

The Torture Litmus Test
BY Scott Horton - Nov 2, 2007 - http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/11/hbc-90001567


Several days before his first meeting with the Senate Judiciary Committee, Michael Mukasey’s Justice Department handlers arranged a private meeting for him with a number of “movement conservatives.” Two different administration sources have described the meeting to me. During the meeting, Mukasey’s counterparts, largely figures associated with the Federalist Society, pushed him on two points in particular.

First, they wanted him to undertake that he would not appoint a special prosecutor to look into the U.S. attorneys scandal and related charges concerning political prosecutions ... it would quickly run head-on into some of the same figures who sat in the room .....

And second, they pushed aggressively on the torture question. They wanted Mukasey to pledge that he would toe the Administration’s line on “the Program,” that he would continue to protect those who authored the program with the cloak of an Attorney General opinion keeping them safe from prosecution.

Mukasey, I am told, gave vague reassurances on both points, “without completely giving away the shop.”

That meeting and the Judiciary Committee hearing that followed provide a basis for us to conclude that the Bush Administration has developed a new litmus test for its attorney general: he must be prepared to wink at torture publicly, and behind the scenes to issue opinions giving the authors of the program comfort. ................

=====================
Scott Horton has covered the torture issue from long before the recent revelations.
This link gives some idea of the number of essays:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=torture+site%3Aharpers.org&btnG=Search

[L. Coyote]

39. The Party of Torture vs. The Party of Lincoln

The Party of Torture vs. The Party of Lincoln
BY Scott Horton - May 23, 2007 - http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/05/hbc-90000147


Kudos to Greg Djerejian, who demonstrates extraordinary care and insight in dissecting the current infantile banter in the rightwing blogosphere on the issue of torture. Given Karl Rove’s decision to use torture as an election issue in two national elections so far, we shouldn’t be surprised that the Republican base has drunk the Kool-Aid. Nor should we be surprised that the Republican base is ignorant .....

At the time of our nation’s founding we defined ourselves through a few fundamental values–and one of the most important of these was the idea, put forward with exemplary clarity by George Washington, that prisoners must always be treated humanely. No prisoner was to be tortured or harmed, and the religious confession of each prisoner was to be accorded full respect. How far from these noble premises the Bush Administration has fallen. What lesser men they are than our country’s founders.

.....

Under George W. Bush our nation has entered into a period of frightful relapse and degeneracy. It has turned from its own moral legacy. It remains for those of us who care to speak out and try to stem this damage before it is too late.

[L. Coyote]

40. The American Way: Induced Hypothermia, Sleep Deprivation and Water-Boarding?

May 22, 2007 - http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/2007/05/is_this_the_american_way_induc.html
The American Way: Induced Hypothermia, Sleep Deprivation and Water-Boarding?


In short, it turns the U.S. from a leading protector of human rights on the world stage to something of a rogue nation, at least when it comes to torture policy.

For instance, the United States is a signatory to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”). It defines torture as:

“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”

When the U.S. ratified CAT, the Senate defined "cruel, inhuman and degrading" as any practice that would violate the Fifth, Eighth or 14th amendments. Secretary of State Condi Rice has reportedly assured some of her European counterparts that, pursuant to such an interpretation, techniques like water-boarding, cold cell and long-time standing would no longer be permissible. However, Administration lawyers like David Addington have made the argument that some of these tactics are permissible under a 'shocks the conscience' reading of the U.S. Constitution, and so it is all but certain these techniques remain in active use by CIA interrogators today. Related, these techniques are in violation of Article III of the Geneva Convention. As the Washington Post previously editorialized:

Common Article 3, which prohibits cruel treatment and humiliation, is an inflexible standard. The U.S. military, which lived with it comfortably for decades before the Bush administration, just re-embraced it after a prolonged battle with the White House. The Army issued a thick manual this month that tells interrogators exactly what they can and cannot do in complying with the standard. The nation's most respected military leaders have said that they need and want nothing more to accomplish the mission of detaining and interrogating enemy prisoners -- and that harsher methods would be counterproductive.

Mr. Bush wants to replace these clear rules with a flexible and subjective standard -- one that would legalize any method that does not "shock the conscience."

[mmonk]

43. They don't have to admit to what a blind man can see.

[L. Coyote]

46. And, the do have the right to remain silent LOL

[LeftCoast]

44. Unfortunately, your explanation doesn't fit the anti-Dem narrative

So many people around here won't listen. It's absolutely fascinating to watch folks glom onto every bit of negative reporting about Dems and be absolutely oblivious to who it's coming from. Any positive news or information that doesn't fit the narrative is also discarded. I'm through arguing with them. It does no good and just raises my bp.

[L. Coyote]

45. There are two different groups in the Rovian echo chamber, the naive left and the trolls

It is important to call out the BULLSHIT so the naive have both sides of the argument. Unfortunately, the trolls are vocal, well-organized, well-paid, and work like an orchestra, reinforcing each other, recommending each other, etc., attempting to drown out the truth.

Truth wins out, calling out falsehoods drives the LIES back into the darkness. We need more critical reasoning on DU, and the narrative shifts quickly when reasonable arguments are properly laid out with factual foundation, especially in combination with calling BS on obvious irrationality.