A government “of the people, by the people, for the people” can be a double-edged sword. Of course, in theory, it means that we, through the democratic process, determine what the government should and shouldn’t do. However…many people don’t take the time to realize that it also means that we…are then responsible for what the government ultimately does. That is, of course, unless the government was concealing its actions from our view, effectively removing our ability to consent/dissent.
It’s a painful revelation, if one is encountering it for the first time. It means, for example, that if the United States tortured detainees…that we are responsible for it. That is why it is so very difficult for some to even admit that waterboarding IS, in fact, TORTURE. Because if it is…then WE tortured people. While it is should be obvious to even the most simple-minded of our citizenry that certain actions we engaged in were torture, were in violation of more than one international treaty, were in violation of the articles of war, and were in violation of our own federal statutes…some people simply cannot bring themselves to admit it. It is simply too embarrassing…too painful…that a nation once so noble, could have sunk so low. Even today, as I watched Fox News during lunch (not my channel choice, but c’est la vie), I watched as a guest expert on their “news” program stated plainly that the actions detailed in the recently released Inspector General’s findings were CLEARLY torture…only to have the host of the show quickly assert that “many people” would not call the actions in the report “torture.” Perhaps…but those “many people” would be mistaken, and in the depths of profound self-deception. In fact, despite the fact that the Inspector General’s report describes in detail thoroughly disgusting practices, that may well have exceeded even the level of interrogation that was authorized…and even though the report noticeably does not show that torture was necessary to produce results…Fox News’ website already claims that the report may serve as proof of the torture’s efficacy: “Two new documents released by the CIA on enhanced interrogation techniques appear to declare a success efforts to gain intelligence on potential terror attacks, leading opponents of an investigation into CIA interrogators wondering about the Obama administration’s motives.“
So, let’s perform a quick examination of recent events, so that we can judge for ourselves:
- The heavily-redacted Inspector General’s report (may be found here), seems to make clear the following: 1- The measures were approved at a HIGH level 2- They threatened to execute detainees, held mock executions 3- They threatened to kill detainees’ families, rape their mothers, their wives, and their children in front of them 4- They applied pressure to detainees’ carotid arteries, restricting bloodflow to the brain, causing unconsciousness 5- Detainees were struck in the torso with rifle butts and knees 6- Detainees were waterboarded in the style of Japanese prisoner torture 7- Detainees were suspended by their arms to simulate shoulder dislocation 8- Detainees were kept in soiled diapers for extended periods 9- Detainees were stripped naked and doused with water on a bare floor to induce hypothermia 10- Detainees died as the result of their treatment 11- The interrogators received only two weeks training in how to perform interrogations, based on flawed/exaggerated study data produced by the CIA 12- Detainees were tortured despite the absence of any information indicating that they were guilty of anything, or even that they knew anything 13- Detainees were tortured who were likely to have provided information, perhaps even more reliable information without torture. Salon has a good write-up of the report, for those who do not wish to read (or who cannot stomach) the actual report.
- Quick FYI: It is worth mentioning, related to the list of activities and revelations above, that both the torture measures AND the death threats…are violations of anti-torture laws.
- Faced with the Inspector General’s findings that the treatment of detainees was, at times, “unauthorized, improvised, inhumane“…Attorney General Holder was left with little choice but to appoint John Durham as a Special Investigator to look into the matter. While Obama and Holder have both expressed that the wish for Durham to focus only on the interrogators, and only those that exceeded the Department of Justice authorization memos…it is worth mentioning that Durham will have the authority to pursue ANY relevant information WHEREVER it may lead. The Wall Street Journal did an interesting short piece on Durham here. A registered Republican…interesting choice.
- Mr. Pot…Meet Mr. Kettle: It is to be expected that the appointment of a Special Investigator would prompt statements from Republican leaders, accusing the administration of somehow “making America less safe.” What was more than a little unexpected (and deliciously ironic) was former Vice President Cheney’s accusation that the move was a sign of the administration attempting to “politicize” the Justice Department. Yes…this, coming from the man who most hold ultimately responsible for the politically motivated hiring and firing of U.S. Attorneys…especially those thought to be “lefties,” or “lesbians,” or simply not in favor of pursuing unfounded, politically motivated investigations. This claim is also interesting…coming from a man who many expect was the “administration source” of orders to use torture against detainees.
- Plus…Cheney is simply dead wrong. Obama and the administration have somewhat disappointingly sided with NOT investigating the torture that occurred during the Bush years…it was exclusively Attorney General Holder’s call to appoint an Investigator.
- Cheney…was not finished. He also has stated that these interrogators…”deserve our gratitude” and do not deserve “to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions.“ Humor me, by following the logic: if interrogators broke the laws (even if ordered to do so…as being ordered to do so is NOT a legal defense), and committed despicable acts of torture and coercion against American prisoners, sometimes even resulting in the prisoners’ deaths…then according to Cheney, they deserve our “gratitude.” Is this how Americans are usually expected to treat members of our society that break the laws…even those committing murder?
- Ari Fleischer, press secretary under Bush, said, “I think the decision is disgusting. It’s amazing to me that the people who kept us safe may now become the people our government prosecutes. There are plenty of real criminals out there -- it would be nice if the Justice Department went after them.“ First of all, Mr. Fleischer…there is little proof these people “kept us safe,” and there is, indeed, an argument to be made that their actions made both us and our soldiers LESS safe and resulted in the swelling of ranks within terrorist organizations. Secondly, if they broke the law…then they ARE “real criminals,” as you say…that’s the definition of “criminal” we use here in the United States.
- Meanwhile, some people…think the administration and the Justice Department have not gone far enough. Representative Jerry Nadler, a senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, has pointed out the simple truth: the President and other government officials have sworn oaths to defend the Constitution and laws of this country. By willingly ignoring the growing mountain of evidence that serious crimes were committed…they are in violation of that oath. What is more, since under the anti-torture act of 1996, the United States government is obligated to investigate accusations of torture…they are not only violating their oaths, but they are also violating the law which REQUIRES an investigation. Until they do so…they are, in effect, criminals themselves.
- It had long been speculated that the Bush Administration had “manipulated” terror alerts to their political advantage, following a simple formula: when something occurs that either hurts Republicans or helps Democrats…quickly distract the public with a new terrifying, unsubstantiated threat warning. Now, Tom Ridge, former Secretary of Homeland Security…has verified that he was asked to change the alert level for political reasons: “Ridge was never invited to sit in on National Security Council meetings; was ‘blindsided’ by the FBI in morning Oval Office meetings because the agency withheld critical information from him; found his urgings to block Michael Brown from being named head of the emergency agency blamed for the Hurricane Katrina disaster ignored; and was pushed to raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush’s re-election, something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over.“ Congratulations to Keith Olbermann, who first succinctly reported on this pattern way back in 2006 in a segment titled the “Nexus of Politics and Terror.“ Here’s the clip:
I’ve said this before: it is worth the shame, to get to the truth and to reconcile with what WE CLAIM are our ideals. If laws were broken, and there is certainly enough evidence to indicate that they were, then there MUST be an investigation. If such an investigation reveals individuals who broke the law, along with any individuals who ordered them to break the law…those people should face judgment in a court of law. Those who claim to value our Constitution have no choice but to call for this…or to reveal themselves to be liars who care little for the Constitution and for Due Process. In the Nuremberg trials following World War II…we clearly said it is NOT a justification to perform crimes for the sake of one’s country…we clearly said it is NOT a justification to commit crimes simply because you were ordered to do so…we prosecuted the torturers, the people who watched them torture and did nothing, the people who ordered them to torture, and the judges who said it was legal for them to torture. If we now shirk our responsibilities under the law, and because this is a government “of the people, by the people, for the people,“ then we are ALL hypocrites, we are ALL criminals, and we are ALL torturers.