Tweet
I made some claims about the treaty obligations of the U.S. in some comments to some FDL posts tonight on the basis of memory. I went back to find the references (mostly in Glenn Greenwald’s blog) to verify my memory, and thought it would be useful to highlight them in one place. The links and some extracts from the Greenwald posts are at the end of this post.
I think there are three important points everyone should make in discussing the topic of accountability for torture committed by the U.S.
1) The U.S. is obliged to investigate credible allegations of torture committed under its auspices, under a treaty (Convention Against Torture) signed by none other than Ronald Reagan. I am no lawyer, but I believe that the initial investigation does not have to be a criminal investigation, but it must thoroughly investigate all credible allegations, and no one, whether high or low, can be given complete immunity from prosecution.
2) The U.S. government, and the officially respectable national affairs press and media, take these treaty obligations very seriously when torture is suspected in other countries.
3) A nearly two-thirds majority of the U.S. population favors some kind of investigation. A plurality of 38% favor criminal investigations –which seems to me to be a stronger measure than the minimum initial actions required under the Convention Against Torture.
So, what possible excuse can there be for any further delay in a nonpartisan, and thorough, investigation, and that will now or in the near future, be available for public inspection? How will the country be “torn apart” if 2/3 of the country want investigations?
Our timid, feckless and cowardly leaders need to start taking effective action soon. Silly measures like fighting the release of further evidence will only backfire, and harm U.S. efforts in the long run. Already there are accounts of horrific tortures supposedly committed by the U.S. , comparable to that committed by very bad actors, particularly the Japanese during WWII: burnings, electric shocks, purposefully infecting captives with disease, etc.
Some of these stories seem doubtful. For example, captives were supposedly threatened with injection with disease (“dog cysts” whatever that is supposed to mean). Were they going to inject prisoners with Giardia? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giardia_lamblia) That sounds unlikely. Also IMHO are stories that people were given gasoline enemas. More likely, these were techniques of psychological torture. If I were doing it, I would just throw an oily rag in the room to get some gasoline smell going and torture them with hot water, and tell them it was gasoline. But, in fact, we do not know whether they are true or not. But it is indisputable fact, that the U.S. stands accused of such torture, whether we like it or not, or believe it or not.
There are also pictures that are advertised as being “new” even if they may not be new at all. Some of these are rather worse than what we have seen so far in that there is fresh, bloody evidence of beatings.
Many people susceptible to recruitment into terrorism, or who have the choice of passively tolerating terrorists or actively working with us, will NOT believe Obama’s assertion that there is nothing so bad in the new photos. They very well may believe the worst rumors, whether true or not.
It is time to start real investigations. Otherwise our government will be perceived as contemptible hypocrites who defy the will of their own people, and the new administration and Congress, will become objectively criminal through deriliction of their duties under international law, rather than merely corrupt, cowardly, feckless, incompetent self-destructive, and very much unworthy of the people they serve, who once again, show more character, wisdom, insight, courage and common sense that their government.
Patriot Daily News Clearing House, at Daily Kos
May 17, 2009
Torture News Roundup: Cheney’s Screwed.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/17/732512/-Torture-News-Roundup:-Cheneys-Screwed
Juan Cole
Informed Consent
Australian Press Releases Abu Ghraib Photos
http://www.juancole.com/2009/05/australian-press-releases-abu-ghraib.html
Glenn Greewald’s blog on Salon
Saturday April 25, 2009
Transcript: Interview with U.N. torture official Manfred Novak
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/25/nowak/index.html
Excerpts from Novak:
… if under the direct jurisdiction of the United States of America, a government official – whether its a high official or a low official or a police officer or military officer, doesn’t matter – whoever practices torture shall be brought before an independent criminal court and be held accountable. That is, the torturer, him or herself, but also those who are ordering torture practices, or in any other way participating in the practice of torture. This is a general obligation, and it applies to everybody; there are no exceptions in the Convention.
… not every investigation into an allegation of torture must be a criminal investigation. If you look at Article 13 of the Convention, it’s much broader. What is important is that every single credible allegation of torture, be it now by a victim, be it by other sources, must be investigated by a competent authority, and I would think that there is a enough evidence about torture practices under the time of the Bush administration that would warrant an independent, comprehensive investigation, not only about the legal memos, and the legal authorization, but about the actual practice. Who was tortured by whom, with what methods, etc. That should be first investigated. It does not have to be a criminal investigation….
I think if there is any kind of amnesty law, or executive order to say that nobody would be prosecuted for the crime of torture, that’s a clear violation of the obligation under the Convention Against Torture, even if it’s only those who actually tortured upon the command of higher authority; there, Article 2-3 of the Convention is very clear that the fact that somebody tortures on the basis of an order does not relieve him or her of the obligation not to torture…
From
Glenn Greewald’s blog on Salon
Sunday May 17, 2009
Distorting public opinion on torture investigations
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/17/cap/index.html
Results from USA Today/Gallup Poll on desire for investigation into U.S. torture, survey of 1,027 adults, landline and cellphone:
38% of respondents favor Criminal Investigation
24% of respondents favor Independent Panel
24% of respondents favor Neither
Glenn Greenwald
Tuesday March 10, 2009
New U.N. human rights report and America’s lectures to other countries
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/03/10/hiatt/index.html
7 Comments
The problem is the same one as gone on forever -or so it seems- of the ‘government’ saying one thing and doing another.
It ought to be called the United States of Hypocrisy.
They are not new. It is a case of web sites reporting what another site reports without looking at the date of the documentary. This is a repost from the 15th to avoid linking to another diary. The pictures are from the video tapes, or taken at the same time as the security cameras made videos, or a combination of both. In the documentary Senator Shelby refers to the pictures that he and other senators viewed. He expresses his shock at seeing a photo of a detainee lying in a pool of blood with an obvious wound. He also mentions seeing a photo of a detainee with his face beaten, or shot, off.
***********
” On Wednesday 16 February 2006, Australian public broadcaster SBS current affairs program DATELINE telecast a segment featuring 60 new photos of the torture inflicted on prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. These photos were secured by court order – the ACLU figures prominently in the report – but these photos haven’t yet been shown in the media anywhere in the United States. Because of the broadcast on SBS, you now have access to both Web-downloadable versions and BitTorrent file-sharing network versions of the broadcast on this site. THESE PHOTOS ARE VERY DISTURBING. Please do not view this video if you are easily disturbed by graphic imagery of torture and death. “
http://www.dahrjamailiraq.com/…..b-tiny.php
Thanks for the additional information on the purportedly new pictures in Juan Cole’s blog, and the link.
I think my point still stands however. The idea is “out there” that the U.S. has done more torture, and more horrible torture, than it is currently admitting. True or not, believable to us or not, the suspicion is “out there”, that cannot be denied.
Pictures of obscure provenance, some long available to the public, will be advertised as shocking new evidence that the U.S. is trying to hide, and the rumor mills will do there work, to the detriment of U.S. national interests. And to our moral stature. And we will stand accused their very existence that we are hypocrites and consider ourselves above the law we ourselves insist others obey, simply because we refuse to conduct a proper investigation that is required by a treaty that the Great Republican Sainted President Reagan signed, and that the majority of the US population wants.
I cannot think of more self-defeating strategy in what is supposed to be our great ‘long war’ against a mortal threat.
Anyone can see that this does not make sense, unless you are corrupt member of the U.S. elite, who has a vested interest making as few waves as possible.
I guess I am “somewhat exercised” by these recent developments, as Twain might have put it.
Fredman parroted Yoo’s memos.(page 55 of the PDF). He made it sound like Yoo’s words were the words from the Convention. I have no doubt that there is much more to be disclosed. If you read the testimonies of x detainees and x Guantanamo guards, you get more pieces of the whole picture. Much of the horror of what was done to these boys and men will not be proven by pictures, or video tape. Fredman warned against videotapes at Guantanamo. I dare say that he showed his guilt right then and there. He knew that the techniques he was authorizing were torture; irregardless of what Yoo said in his memos, or what he himself pretended to believe.
*************
” At the meeting, the minutes reflect that CIA lawyer Jonathan Fredman also discussed whether or not the techniques in the BSCT memo complied with applicable legal standards. Mr.Fredman explained:
Under the Torture Convention, torture has been prohibited by international law, but the language of the statutes is written vaguely.Severe mental and physical pain is prohibited. The mental part is explained as poorly as the physical. Severe physical pain [is] described as anything causing permanent damage to major organs or body parts. Mental torture [is] described as anything leading to permanent, profound damage to the senses or personality. It is basically subject to perception. If the detainee dies you’re doing it wrong. So far the techniques we have addressed have not proven to produce these types of results, which in away challenges what the BSCT paper says about not being able to prove whether these techniques will lead to permanent damage. Everything in the BSCT[memo] is legal from a civilian standpoint.
(U) According to the minutes, when the participants of the meeting discussed whether or
not to videotape the “aggressive sessions or interrogations,” Mr. Fredman said that videotaping
of”even totally legal techniques will look ‘ugly. Mr. Becker, who agreed with the CIA
lawyer’s assessment, added that “videotapes are subject to too much scrutiny in court.” “
http://armed-services.senate.g…..202009.pdf
The Convention was concise because mental and physical pain are human emotions and suffering that are understood by normal people. We know what pain means. Sadly, nobody foresaw a Yoo. A human so devoid of positive human attributes that he could redefine the meaning of Article 1 into something totally abhorrent to any decent human being.
**************
” PART I
Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term “torture” means 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. “
http://findarticles.com/p/arti…..2034/pg_2/
So what’s the problem?
This is the problem;
It is long past time to start real investigations.
Our government is comprised of contemptible hypocrites who defy the will of their own people, and the new administration and Congress are, viewed objectively, criminal through deriliction of their duties under international law, rather than merely corrupt, cowardly, feckless, incompetent self-destructive, and very much unworthy of the people they currently dominate, and intend to enslave, who once again, show more character, wisdom, insight, courage and common sense that their government, but who so far cannot face these facts for what they are.
We are firmly in the grip of fascists, and we’ve passed the point where we can save ourselves without throwing a lot of people in jail.
And if this can be believed -which I think it can- we have our ‘reason’.
Seems to be the answer. The header says it all ie..’folks who actually run the government’. I think the following is the answer to the sudden death of al Libi. Those folks fore mentioned could ill afford to have him testifying at the up coming military commissions trials, or anywhere else. His death was certain to occur as soon as his location was known and contact made.
**********
” Al-Libi also had been identified recently by U.S. defense lawyers as a possible key witness in upcoming trials of top terror suspects. “We want answers,” said an administration official familiar with the case, who asked not to be identified discussing a sensitive matter. “We want to know what really happened here.” “
http://www.newsweek.com/id/197963?from=rss