Pressure Grows to Investigate Interrogations

[Bragi]

Source: NY Times

WASHINGTON — Pressure mounted on President Obama on Monday for more thorough investigation into harsh interrogations of terrorism suspects under the Bush administration, even as he tried to reassure the Central Intelligence Agency that it would not be blamed for following legal advice...

Others pushing for more investigation included Philip D. Zelikow, the former State Department counselor in the Bush administration. On his blog for Foreign Policy magazine and in an interview, Mr. Zelikow said it was not up to a president to rule out an inquiry into possible criminal activity. “If a Republican president tried to do this, people would be apoplectic,” he said.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/us/politics/21intel.html?hp

---

Truth is, Obama can choose not to launch investigations and prosecutions for torture, but he can't stop others from triggering these processes.

Unfortunately for him, he has now set his administration on a course such that they will end up trying to block much-needed investigations, and end up defending the rights of torturers to avoid accountability as legal processes unfold.

I don't think this will end well for his administration. There will be a political price to pay for trying to pander to the Repubs and the security establishment on this absolutely pivotal issue.

- B

[The Stranger]

1. I think he knew the pressure would build, and that he would have to "give in" to it.

He simply cannot think we can let this go.

[Bragi]

2. I hope you are correct /nt

[ProgressIn2008]

7. Why would he need to do that? Why not declare open support for rule of law?

I'm not getting the super secret plan arguments. I haven't heard a good explanation why the head of the exec branch shouldn't publicly declare all due support for the rule of law. Why go to talk to the CIA and say that some mistakes were potentially made but don't be discouraged?

[No Elephants]

10. You're kind. These super secret double backward sideways plan folks scare me. What really puzzles

me is where they store the pods.

[No Elephants]

8. Are you saying he is too cowardly and shallow and dishonest to do the right thing unless

he can fool people into thinking he was forced into it?

[The Stranger]

12. Not at all.

It is politics. Political jiu-jitsu, if you will.

Check the breaking news that just came out (he's "allowing" it to go forward, apparently).

(Damn, this guy is good.)

[No Elephants]

15. Yes, but political jujitsu has a purpose. You engage in it for a reason. So, what was his reason

for needing to pretend that he does not want to prosecute for torture?

[The Stranger]

17. Probably many reasons.

But at least this way he avoids taking on the brunt of the inevitable backlash by those who already call him "Muslim," "Communist," "Socialist," and any number of other lies.

WE already know how he feels regarding torture. There is no need to convince us.

[EFerrari]

11. Yes. I think that, too. n/t

[Overseas]

18. I agree. Especially after he declared a stop to the torture as soon as he took office.

He also acted as a good Commander in Chief, knowing that torture is mostly ineffective and if we practice torture our troops are more likely to be subjected to it.

I am glad the discussion has opened up but am sad that we still have conservative-dominated TV media using softy euphemisms to describe torture. "Harsh Tactics" "aggressive techniques" etc.

Having practiced torture on a much larger scale than ever before, Cheney will dig out three bits of information gleaned from the HUNDREDS of incidents, and the conservative media that defended the war will try to pretend it was useful in desperate circumstances.

Even though http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22detain.html?_r=1&hp

According to several former top officials involved in the discussions seven years ago, they did not know that the military training program, called SERE, for Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape, had been created decades earlier to give American pilots and soldiers a sample of the torture methods used by Communists in the Korean War, methods that had wrung false confessions from Americans.

Even George J. Tenet, the C.I.A. director who insisted that the agency had thoroughly researched its proposal and pressed it on other officials, did not examine the history of the most shocking method, the near-drowning technique known as waterboarding.

The top officials he briefed did not learn that waterboarding had been prosecuted by the United States in war-crimes trials after World War II and was a well-documented favorite of despotic governments since the Spanish Inquisition; one waterboard used under Pol Pot was even on display at the genocide museum in Cambodia.

They did not know that some veteran trainers from the SERE program itself had warned in internal memorandums that, morality aside, the methods were ineffective.

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Many of us common people will also continue to put pressure on this administration to investigate.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

4. It could be

the ulitmiate in CYA and brilliant strategy. By saying he would not prosecute and then evetually, due to pressure and outrage have to change his mind he can say to the ones on the hot seat, 'sorry, but they demand an investigation, there's nothing I can do'
:shrug:

[LeFleur1]

6. There Are Three Branches of Government

The Judicial Branch is NOT suppose to take orders from the President.
To try to influence the judicial branch or deny them their constitutional duties to investigate is a crime in itself.

[No Elephants]

9. Please see Post #8.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

13. This is all called

playing politics. Obama knows how to do that. This ship he's steering is not exactly in deep open waters. We are close to the rocks and a wrong move could sink it....... :shrug: So he's playin' it cool.

[Iowa]

14. You are correct...

It is pretty clear that they ARE saying that he won't "do the right thing unless he can fool people into thinking he was forced into it". I happen to believe that's bullshit, but that's surely what they're saying.

But even if he is really doing what they claim he's doing, this isn't a battle that should be fought with subterfuge and game playing. This is one of those things that is so fundamental to what this country stands for that it must be dealt with directly and unequivocally.

Eight years ago the government sanctioned torture of prisoners (including children) would have been unthinkable. The Bush administration dragged this country into the dark ages and plunged the national mood into a depression via all sorts of vile behavior - with torture at the pinnacle. Now that we finally have an opportunity to cleanse ourselves of that stain, Obama is standing in the way. Some here are claiming that he is pretending to stand in the way. They're even proclaiming that it's a "brilliant" move, but that type of thinking should be rejected. There is no getting around the fact that it would be both depraved and beneath the dignity of the office of the Presidency to play coy when it comes to the government sanctioned torture of prisoners and children. If Obama truly believes that torturers should be held accountable for their crimes, yet is pretending to excuse and shield them in some convoluted scheme to bring them to justice, he will have accomplished it at the expense of legitimizing torture as something that is open to debate in a civilized society... he will have added the weight of the Presidency behind the notion that "following orders" is an excuse for committing atrocities. The issue of torture will have been (and has been) made more ambiguous due to his actions.

This is a battle that simply cannot be won on a 51-49 split, because to win it that way is to lose. Unless we want it to reoccur, it is crucial that it be put to rest forever. It is essential that we rise up, united as a nation founded on personal liberty, and say NO! NEVER! Not under ANY circumstances. And to insure that everyone understands that it is antithetical to everything our nation stands for, anyone who dares to stain our country with such vile acts will pay a massive price.

In order to sleep at night there are some bugs that are so nasty that you smash them with the heel of your shoe until it's really, truly, completely dead, and you're damned sure that it's not coming back to bite you again. Government sanctioned torture is like that.

Until Obama we were able to delude ourselves into believing that U.S. government sanctioned torture was driven by the animals in the Bush administration - an administration that was probably unelected, no less. It was a national nightmare with an eight year shelf life that never would have occurred were it not for a dumbed-down electorate and proprietary corporate vote counting. At least that's what we told ourselves. That consolation has now been stripped away. By excusing and shielding torturers, Obama is making that nightmare a permanent part of the national psyche. Gerald Ford redux (except at least with Ford we had the consolation that Nixon was forced out in disgrace, just one step ahead of the law).

We now have a president who takes a "moderate" position on torture. With each passing day, and as the broken promises and disappointments pile up, it is becoming pretty obvious that with Obama we got exactly what we paid for - better than the alternative and not a penny more.

[No Elephants]

16. And why would the President of the United States wish to have it seem that

1/ He has no interest in prosecuting torturers

and

2/ Despite having no interest in prosecuting torturers (for which presumably he would have a good reason), he is caving into public pressure?

[Xipe Totec]

5. These are not the torturers you're looking for...

I don't think the Jedi mind trick will work this time...