Who Knew What? When Did They Know It?

Much is being made of this ABC report that Speaker Nancy Pelosi was indeed informed of the torture being meted out in our name. Spencer Ackerman says it best:

No more lies, no more obfuscation, no more cant, no more excuses, no more torture.

The upcoming Senate hearings on torture will look into what the previous administration did and did not do. They will NOT be investigating what hand elected legislators had in this sad chapter. That is a problem and until we have a full accounting of what everyone in government knew and did during those days we will not be able to move on.

A Profile In Courage

If you read only one piece about the issue of torture you must read this piece by Mike Isikoff writing in Newsweek:

Only weeks later, this clash of cultures played out in the heated dispute over how to handle Abu Zubaydah. A Palestinian who is believed to have served as logistics chief for Afghan terrorist-training camps, Abu Zubaydah was captured after a bloody gunfight. He was transferred from Pakistan to Thailand, where Soufan and Gaudin immediately sought to gain his trust by nursing his wounds. (Soufan would not comment on the location of the interrogation; sources, who like others interviewed for this story didn't want to be named discussing sensitive information, have placed him in Thailand at this time. An FBI spokesman says Gaudin, who is still in the bureau, would not comment on his role in the Abu Zubaydah interrogations.) "We kept him alive," Soufan says. "It wasn't easy, he couldn't drink, he had a fever. I was holding ice to his lips." Gaudin, for his part, cleaned Abu Zubaydah's buttocks. During this time, Soufan and Gaudin also began the questioning; it became a "mental poker game." At first, Abu Zubaydah even denied his identity, insisting that his name was "Daoud."

But Soufan had poured through the bureau's intelligence files and stunned Abu Zubaydah when he called him "Hani"—the nickname that his mother used for him. Soufan also showed him photos of a number of terror suspects who were high on the bureau's priority list. Abu Zubaydah looked at one of them and said, "That's Mukhtar."

Now it was Soufan who was stunned. The FBI had been trying to determine the identity of a mysterious "Mukhtar," whom bin Laden kept referring to on a tape he made after 9/11. Now Soufan knew: Mukhtar was the man in the photo, terror fugitive Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and, as Abu Zubaydah blurted out, " the one behind 9/11."

As the sessions continued, Soufan engaged Abu Zubaydah in long discussions about his world view, which included a tinge of socialism. After Abu Zubaydah railed one day about the influence of American imperialist corporations, he asked Soufan to get him a Coca-Cola—a request that prompted the two of them to laugh. Soon enough, Abu Zubaydah offered up more information—about the bizarre plans of a jihadist from Puerto Rico to set off a "dirty bomb" inside the country. This information led to Padilla's arrest in Chicago by the FBI in early May.

Give Ali Soufan and his FBI compatriots a medal. They deserve it.

Condi Must Go

Here's the link to Condi Must Go.

Cheney Impeachment Hearings?

Three Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee (Robert Wexler (D., Fla.), Luis Gutierrez (D., Ill.) and Tammy Baldwin (D., Wis.)) are calling for the hearings into the impeachment of Dick Cheney go ahead.

Last month, the House of Representatives voted to send a resolution of impeachment of Vice President Cheney to the Judiciary Committee. As members of the House Judiciary Committee, we strongly believe these important hearings should begin.

Although they do not cite the allegations that Cheney's office may be implicated in the CIA Interrogation Tape Destruction Scandal, they do mention the outing of former CIA agent Valerie Plame as one of the issues that requires investigation.

The Dark and Treacherous Dick and His Bizarro World of Truth

Scott Horton's interesting and informative analysis of the CIA Tape Destruction Scandal links to two very important pieces about the cover up of the destruction of the tapes and its possible ramifications. Who may be at the end of this dastardly trail of obfuscation and vicious abrogation of the law is a matter of connecting dots and additional investigation. However, one fact that I was not aware of, or that maybe I overlooked, is that retired CIA agent John Kiriakou is linked to the Scooter Libby case:

According to a declassified document filed with the court after the Libby trial and obtained by Mother Jones, Kiriakou authored a June 10, 2003, email sent to several CIA officials. The message apparently was written in response to intense efforts at that time by the vice president's office to learn how Plame's husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had been selected to go on a CIA-sponsored fact-finding mission to Niger. The email makes clear that senior CIA officials, including Kiriakou's boss and the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence, did not know who Valerie Wilson was at the time. Prodded by Cheney's office, they were seeking information on her role at the agency prior to a scheduled conversation with Libby the next day.

Is the real issue here that Kiriakou links, not only the Plame outing, but the destruction of these tapes to the Vice President's Office? Cheney's current Chief of Staff David Addington is one of those named as a member of a group of four White House staffers involved in discussions about the propriety of destroying the tapes.

It has emerged that at least four White House staff were approached for advice about the tapes, including David Addington, a senior aide to Dick Cheney, the vice-president, but none has admitted to recommending their destruction.

The web woven by the Vice President is indeed one of treachery, secrecy, and deceit, not seen on this scale since the reign of Nixon. Recall that Cheney served as Chief of Staff for then President Gerald Ford, the man who pardoned Nixon. Cheney has spent 32 of the last 35 years advocating a return to the days of the Imperial Presidency.

Sullivan's Best of Series (Torture Edition)

Andrew Sullivan reposted his excellent, and well documented argument against Torture. His write up from earlier this year, about the Former Cheerleader's Administration use of "enhanced interrogation" is at once compelling and horrifying. Some graphic images are included in the post so please use caution if you are in the least bit squeamish.

What has been done in our name? What has been done to our country's reputation? Time for these treacherous rat-bastards to go.

Waterboard Down

I don't know if you have seen this yet, but Mark Bowden of Black Hawk Down fame has an interesting take on the issue of waterboarding.

In the unlikely event that Zubaydah knew nothing of value and that every bit of information he divulged was false, it was still reasonable to assume in 2002 that this was not the case. If his interrogators were able to stop one terror attack by waterboarding him, even if they violated international agreements and our national conscience, it was justified. All nations have laws against killing, but all recognize self-defense as a legitimate excuse. I think the waterboarding in this case is directly analogous, except that Zubaydah himself, although he richly deserves it, was neither killed nor permanently harmed.

In the unlikely event? So we only need a strong suspicion to justify torture?

I also reread this recent post, and its seems Sullivan has indeed tapped the vein of logic with regard to what "enhanced interrogation" means. As long as it only scares the living shit out of the "suspect" then we can claim: No harm, no foul. Jesus! What is this? A pickup basketball game?

Lindsay Graham: A Man Without Honor

Steve Benen, reports on TalkingPointsMemo.com that the shameless quisling Lindsay Graham put a hold on the Anti-Torture Bill now working its way through the Senate. This disgusting little wretch deserves every bad thing that happens to him. As I stated in a previous post:

Maybe, just maybe, their is hope for the Republicans, and the Senate in general (but I’m not holding my breath). Lindsay Graham questioned BG Hartmann, the legal adviser at Gitmo about waterboarding. Graham deserves credit for pressing the issue.

But, Graham is up to his old tricks and Digby has the rundown on this shameless little creature. You can always depend on the Republicans to consistently speak out of both sides of their mouths. Why am I not surprised?

Saying no to torture is a matter of national honor. Honor seems to have fallen out of the Right Wing lexicon. At least the honor as defined in any dictionary I am aware of.

A Hopefule Sign? ... Don't hold your breath ... cowards and war criminals

Maybe, just maybe, their is hope for the Republicans, and the Senate in general (but I’m not holding my breath). Lindsay Graham questioned BG Hartmann, the legal adviser at Gitmo about waterboarding. Graham deserves credit for pressing the issue.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who asked the hypothetical, pushed Hartmann on his answer, asking him directly if it would be a “violation of the Geneva Convention”:

GRAHAM: You mean you’re not equipped to give a legal opinion as to whether or not Iranian military waterboarding, secret security agents waterboarding downed airmen is a violation of the Geneva Convention?

HARTMANN: I am not prepared to answer that question, Senator.

After Hartmann twice refused to answer, Graham dismissed him in disgust, saying he had “no further questions.”

Watch the video. He reminds of the former Walter Reed Commander who got fired. However, this guy is spouting the party line so I suspect his job is safe.

The leadership at the General and Flag Officer level in our military is staggeringly inept and cowardly. These people are so cowed and beholden to the Former Cheerleader and his Gang of War Criminals they won’t stand up to him. Disgraceful. Shameful.

The Vichy Democrats ... A New Posse of Abrogationists is in Town

A little over one year after the American people took the Congress out of the hands of the Republicans, we find out the party given the responsibility to check the authoritarian rule of the Former Cheerleader and his Gang of War Criminals, is in fact: The Vichy Democrats. A money quote from Lambert at Corrente:

Well, I guess now I know why impeachment was “off the table.”

Jesus Sweating Christ! Is their anything these treacherous rat-bastards won't go along with to stay in office? This ship is about to run aground, and we have no responsible leadership in sight.

Glenn Greenwald's thoroughly vicious and entirely delicious take down of the Vichy Democrats is required reading for anyone sickened by the fetid odors emanating from this swamp filled with abrogationists and treacherous liars.

Torture didn't become an American policy despite the best efforts of a righteous Democratic leadership to stop that. Torture became an American policy precisely because a meek and often outright supportive Democratic leadership continuously allowed it.

Time to drain the fetid Congressional swamp and rid ourselves of these quislings.

Insecurity

Another rat leaves the ship and Scott Horton rips National Security Advisor's Francis Townsend resignation letter with this artful take down. Have the War Criminals that serve the Former Cheerleader no shame? None?

No Shit Sherlock, Redux

Bill Clinton inhaled. Elvis Presley is dead. The Pope is Catholic. Bears shit in the woods. Oh yeah and waterboarding is torture. Now that we have cleared up all the great mysteries of the late 20th and early 21st Century, lets get on with putting the Constitution back together. Who knows, some day we may restore our reputation as a shining light of decency and justice for oppressed people everywhere. Maybe. Don't hold your breath, the former Cheerleader and his gang of War Criminals could still screw it up.

Waterboarding is Torture

Many others have linked to this piece by Malcolm Nance at Small War Journal. Read the entire article.

Misunderstanding Torture

The Khmer Rouge practiced torture as an exquisite and horrifying method of subjugating even the mildest forms for dissent. Waterboarding was a regular treat for any dissident who didn't end up in the Killing Fields. What the Khmer Rough knew, and what other state sponsors of torture know, is that torture is NOT an effective means of extracting actionable intelligence. However, it is a highly effective method of terrorizing people who might be sympathetic to the cause of the person, or persons, being tortured. In other words, torture is really only effective as a means of Terrorism. Yes, that is correct. Terrorism. Why does Rudy support Terrorism? Have we become a bunch of self-hating Americans? No! We just hate all the other Americans who hate other Americans for not hating the Fanatic Jihadist enough. Cazart!

Why Torture?

Even the Khmer Rouge knew that torture could not be used to obtain reliable, actionable intelligence. Torture was used as a means to terrorize suspected dissidents, and to create a more servile population.

It is my OPINION the current administration understands the point I just made. The "extreme interrogation" methods are being used to terrorize Muslims. Why? To create fear amongst those who might be inclined to do us and our allies harm. We can see how well its working. Again--this is my opinion. But what other reason could these people have for continuing this madness? Isn't brute force the modus operandi for this administration? Why should we be surprised Bush and the gang would think any differently about torture than they do about blowing up Iran because they--might--someday--in the future--have a nuke? Isn't a "raghead" just a "raghead"? (Unless, of course, you want to hold hands with the "good ones" because your family has done business with them for almost a century.)

Sully Throws the WC at Bush

Some of the more vociferous comments in the blogosphere have used the term war criminal to describe the former Cheerleader and his henchmen. Evidently it ain't just those wild and crazy liberals anymore.