|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Vyan (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 01:34 AM Original message |
The Case for the Impeachment of George W. Bush. Count 3 : War Crimes, Torture and Murder |
(Crossposted from Truth 2 Power Project)
The countdown to the start of the 110th Congress is growing shorter. Although Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi have put Impeachment "Off the table" - simply because at this point in time most of the American public would not support such a move, and would consider it merely partisan maneuvering as was the Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton. On this point I believe they are correct, thus the terms have to modified. Impeachment has to be seen as merely the first step toward the ultimate goal of Removal, Indictment and Prosecution of those who have committed crimes against our Constitution. Thus I present Count 3 in my multipart series on why George W. Bush must be Impeached. The Impeachment Case Against George W. Bush - Count 3 : War Crimes, Conspiracy, Torture and Murder. George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales and Donald Rumsfeld did commit a series of Capital Crimes with malice aforethought, including grave breaches in the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of War - actions which have led to numerous counts of maltreatment of prisoners and torture up to and including over multiple murders under color of authority Exhibit A: The Gonzales Memo Following the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on 9/11 - America moved into a War Footing against Al-Qeada and Afghanistan. Congress passed the Authorization to Use Military Force, and our government began to grapple with the issue of how to handle captured prisoners and terrorist suspects. On January 24, 2002 Alberto wrote a Memo (PDF) addressing this subject. "It is difficult to predict the motives of prosecutors and independent counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges based on Section 2441 Although many at the time claimed the the exception of Taliban and Al-Qeada fighters from Geneva was done because neither were signatories of Geneva, the truth is very different. First of all the fact that they aren't signatories is irrelevant - We Are Signatories and as such we are required to abide by Geneva. Geneva Article 2 In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. But as was shown from his memo Gonzales had a different concern altogether. He was worried that some "wacky" prosecutor might determine that the Administration had violated 18 USC 2441 - the War Crimes Act - which states. (a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death. The Conventions lay out specifically how Prisoners of War are to be identified and defined - and it's fair to say that the fact that Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters do not wear a uniform or have specific insignia exempts them from that category. They can not be considered Prisoners of War under Geneva, although the definition of an armed militia under Article 4 comes very close. 2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: And even if the lack of a "distinctive sign" causes the Militia definition to not apply to Al-Qeada or the Taliban as alleged by Gonzales - Article 5 settles the matter. Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal. And just what are those protections? The following. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: So in summary, Gonzales letter shows that he was aware of the President's deliberate intention to subject captured al-Qeada and Taliban members to cruel treatment, torture, humiliation and degradation and restrict their access to the courts. All of which are clearly grave breaches of Geneva and punishable by fines, life imprisonment and the death penalty under United States Federal Law. This memo effectively laid the groundwork for all that was to follow - which was a series of deliberate criminal acts. This memo is proof a Conspiracy to Commit Torture. His attempts to deflect and distract from these crimes by calling some of the minor provisions of Geneva "quaint" are as transparent as they are pathetic. Exhibit B: The Bybee Memo. Clearly still concerned that the Presidents determination to exclude the entire newly created classification of "Enemy Combatant" from Geneva might not actually stand up to any reasonable judicial scrutiny - ha, imagine that - in August of 2002 Gonzales requested a memo from the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel to re-define torture so as to ensure it's availability to U.S. interrogators while still remaining under the radar of Geneva, 2441 and also 2340. We conclude that for an act to constitute torture as defined in Section 2340, it must inflict pain that is difficult to endure. Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent to intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death. For purely mental pain or suffering to amount to torture under Section 2340, it must result in significant psychological harm of significant duration, e.g., lasting for months or even years. We conclude that the mental harm also must result from one of the predicate acts listed in the statute, namely: threats of imminent death; threats of infliction of the kind of pain that would amount to physical torture; infliction of such physical pain as a means of psychological torture; use of drugs or other procedures designed to deeply disrupt the senses, or fundamentally alter an individual’s personality; or threatening to do any of these things to a third party. Section 2340 of U.S. Law States: (a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life. What we have here is a situation where those who would normally be the Prosecutors in a case of War Crimes or Torture have been requested by the White House to Act as Defense Counsel in order to help them avoid possible prosecution for their intended crimes. It's the equivelent of allowing a Jaywalker to redraw the crosswalk lines in the middle of the street - as he's crossing it. By claiming that torture isn't "torture" until the subject either losses a limb, suffers organ failure and dies - then practically anything that leaves the person alive and breathing with all of their fingers and toes -- would not be torture under the legal definition. Common sense tells us a different story. And another problem here is that the White House and the Prosecutors do not determine what is an isn't the law - Congress and Judges do. (Although Jay Bybee has now been appointed as a Federal Appeals Judge (In the 9th Circuit - the one which reviews the DC Court), he wasn't at the time that he headed the OLC and therefore his opinions then are not "opinions of the court" in the legal sense.) Exhibit C: The Rumsfeld Papers Following the Gonzales and Bybee Memos, Rumsfeld issued his own memo in December of 2002 in response to a request from "additional techniques beyond those in the field manual" from soldiers in Guantanemo Bay. From the the ACLU's Torture Timeline Rumsfeld prescribes new interrogation policy for Guantanamo, authorizing “stress positions,” hooding, 20-hour interrogations, removal of clothing, exploiting phobias to induce stress (e.g., fear of dogs), prolonged isolation, sensory deprivation, and forced grooming. These techniques soon spread to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. Later the Pentagon convened a woking group which began to apply the re-definition of torture to detainee treatment in March of 2003. From the Wapo. Another memorandum, dated March 6, 2003, from a Defense Department working group convened by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to come up with new interrogation guidelines for detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, incorporated much, but not all, of the legal thinking from the OLC memo. The Wall Street Journal first published the March memo. 34 new techniques were recommended by the Working group, Rumsfeld ultimately approved the use of 24 of them including isolation, "inducing fear", false flag and stress positions. The paper trail from the White House to the Pentagon and eventually to Guantanamo Bay, Bagram AFB in Afghanistan and Abu Ghraib is direct, obvious and miles upon miles wide. And the severity of the abuse is far deeper than what has be hinted at by the Abu Ghraib Scandal. WASHINGTON — Pentagon documents released Monday disclosed that Iraqi prisoners had lodged dozens of abuse complaints against U.S. and Iraqi personnel who guarded them at a little-known palace in Baghdad converted to a U.S. prison. Among the allegations was that guards had sodomized a disabled man and killed his brother, whose dying body was tossed into a cell, atop his sister. Since the start of the Iraq War over 100 detainees have died in custody. The circumstances for these deaths have varied wide, some died of natural causes, other during riots or other acts of violence - but a few - were killed as a result of abuse, some died while being interrogated (which would indicate a clear violation of 2441 and 2340 even with the Gonzales and Bybee "re-interpretations") The Pentagon has never provided comprehensive information on how many prisoners taken during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have died. The 108 figure, based on information supplied by Army, Navy and other government officials, includes deaths attributed to natural causes. According to documents gahered by the ACLU, coercive interrogations have led to the deaths of detainees at Bagram AFB in Afghanistan and the Red Cross indicates that 70%-90% of those held at Abu Ghraib are being held by mistake. The U.S. has offered bounties for terrorist suspects which led rival tribes to sell their neighbors into captivity in order to settle old scores or grab their land while lining holds of Bagram and Gitmo with even more innocent persons. But that's not the worst of it, the real problem is the question of exactly what has happened to those detainees who have literally disappeared. Exhibit D: The Ghost Detainees As the number of detainees began to mount, certain "high value targets" began to vanish. Hidden from the Red Cross, these detainees were taken to Secret Prison Installations under the direct orders and approval of President George W. Bush - a clear violating of multiple international laws. According to Human Rights Watch some of those Ghost Detainees included:
Bush has argued that the techniques used to interrogate Zubaydah we're not "torture" - but then again the only proof of that is merely that Zubaydah apparently survived the process under "Bybee Rules" - and that they were effective in helping capture Khalid Shaikh Muhammad. Too bad that simply isn't true as Ron Suskind has revealed. Abu Zubaydah, his captors discovered, turned out to be mentally ill and nothing like the pivotal figure they supposed him to be. CIA and FBI analysts, poring over a diary he kept for more than a decade, found entries "in the voice of three people: Hani 1, Hani 2, and Hani 3" -- a boy, a young man and a middle-aged alter ego. All three recorded in numbing detail "what people ate, or wore, or trifling things they said." Dan Coleman, then the FBI's top al-Qaeda analyst, told a senior bureau official, "This guy is insane, certifiable, split personality." How Zudaybah was interrogated was elaborated on by Gerald Posner. Posner elaborates in startling detail how U.S. interrogators used drugs—an unnamed "quick-on, quick-off" painkiller and Sodium Pentothal, the old movie truth serum—in a chemical version of reward and punishment to make Zubaydah talk. When questioning stalled, according to Posner, cia men flew Zubaydah to an Afghan complex fitted out as a fake Saudi jail chamber, where "two Arab-Americans, now with Special Forces," pretending to be Saudi inquisitors, used drugs and threats to scare him into more confessions. Zudaybah eventually provided the names of several members of the Saudi Royal family who had alleged ties to Bin Laden. Within weeks all of people had died under mysterious circumstances, preventing them from being questioned by U.S. authorities permanently. Whether the information provided by Zubaydah was accurate or simply disinformation design to allow him to escape torture remains unclear. But it's clear that other Ghost Detainees wuch as Ibn al-Shaikh al-Libi (who provided many of the incorrect claims of Iraqi WMD) have been proven to be liars. Even the CIA's own interrogation manuals from the 60's and 80's as used during Vietnam and in Central America do not recommend use of extreme pain. Interrogates who are withholding but feel qualms of guilt and a secret desire to yeild are likely to become intractable if made to endure pain. The reason is that they can interpret the pain as punishment and hence expiation. By voiding the Geneva requirement for judicial review of detainees and their status the likelyhood that mistaken identity and/or innocent persons may be caught in the net of anti-terrorism increases dramatically. 13 CIA Agents have been ordered to be arrested in Italy for the kidnapping and rendition of Abu Omar (aka Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr) an Egyptian who was taken to Cairo and tortured for two years - except that he was the wrong person. As was Khalid Masri, who was kidnapped in the Balkans and flown to Afghanistan and held for four months. German officials have been investigating. And so was Maher Arar, Canadian National whose name was mistakenly included on a terrrorist watch list as he attempted to change planes at Kennedy International Airport, where he was detained - deported to Syria and tortured. Although it could be argued that the actual torture was not conducted by U.S. personnel in these cases, it's clear that these persons would not have been subjected to these conditions if not for U.S. actions and premeditation. These are acts of Conspiracy and subject to the same pentalty as those who actually may have performed the torture under U.S. Law. Exhibit E: The Hamdan Decision. Although Gonzales and Bybee have attempted to provide legal cover for these actions, the entire house of cards they had erected came crashing down in a very large thud with the delivery of the Hamdan Decision which ruled that the Geneva Conventions do indeed apply to "Enemy Combatants". This decision made everything they had done prior to that point, a potential War Crime. Article 3 of the Geneva Convention (III)Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,Aug. 12,1949, <1955 > 6 U..S.T.3316,3318,T.I.A.S.No.3364. The provision is part of a treaty the United States has ratified and thus accepted as binding law. See id.,at 3316. By Act of Congress, moreover, violations of Common Article 3 are considered “war crimes,” punishable as federal offenses,when committed by or against United States nationals and military personnel. See 18 U.S.C.§2441. There should be no doubt,then,that Common Article 3 is part of the law of war as that term is used in §821. Realizing this the CIA Interrogators actually Went on Strike. The Bush administration had to empty its secret prisons and transfer terror suspects to the military-run detention centre at Guantánamo this month in part because CIA interrogators had refused to carry out further interrogations and run the secret facilities, according to former CIA officials and people close to the programme. The Administration reacted strongly to this decision and urged the passage of the Military Commissions Act. Much of the discussion of this act has surrounded it's neutering of Habeas Corpus and it's "re-interpretation of Geneva", but of even greater danger is the fact that this law amended The War Crimes and Torture Acts to apply the Bybee Standard. 2441 and 2340 have been updated as follows: ‘‘(1) PROHIBITED CONDUCT.—In subsection (c)(3), the term A fair reading of this would conclude that coercive interrogation that takes the victim literally to the edge of death - but allows for his being brought back in a manner that doesn't disfigure or maim them - would be perfectly ok. You could even induce death itself using chemicals and then repeatedly revive the subject using a CPR and a defribulator -- and it wouldn't be "torture" in Bushworld. Fortunately most of the rest of us don't live in that deluded fantasy land. On the whole the Administration has done an incredible job of wrangling the law to produce the result they wish. Torture isn't torture. Significant bodily harm is no harm at all. A little dunk in the water is a "No Brainer". In the wake of the Abu Ghraib scandal Congress lobbied for the passage of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, yet that act contains a fatal flaw - the Graham-Levin Amendment which blocks the detainees from access to the court where they can lodge abuse complaints. What is the point of "prohibiting torture" if you've also prohibited the tortured from complaining about it? Talk about "Don't ask - don't tell". As the Hamdan decision made clear - The Bush Adminstration has repeatedly and deliberately violated the Geneva Conventions, they have committed War Crimes, Torture and Conspiracy under U.S. Law and grossly violated the 8th Amendment, but rather than correcting those actions they have - with the aid and complicity of the Repubilcan led 109th Congress - instead created even more clearly unconstitutional law such as the Detainee Treatment Act and Military Commission Act which are clearly unlikely to withstand any serious court challenge. These actions have directly contributed to the abuse of hundreds of detainees, both innocent and not-so-innocent, including kidnapping and even murder. The Administration's Torture double-speak and permissive "anything-goes" attitude may even be traced to the tragedies of Haditha where dozens innocent Iraqi civilians were murdered and Mahmoudiya where a teen age girl who was raped and burned along with her entire family - by U.S. Soldiers. And even with all this information they've gathered using these techniques is highly suspect and may very well have led us directly into a false and unneccesary war with Iraq (see Count 1). The insurgency continues to rage undeterred. Terrorism has increased rather than ben reduced. This policy is a not only crime, it is a failure. But these legal maneuvers have done nothing but delay the inevitable. Although there have been multiple court mashalls and prosecutions of low level soldiers - and there should be - these crimes must be brought into account and ended at the source, and the only way to accomplish this is to Impeach, Remove, Indict and Prosecute George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales and Donald Rumsfled exactly as Amnesty International demanded in May 2005. This policy must be stopped permanently - the American public must be shown that there is no other reasonable choice. Vyan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EST (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:47 AM Response to Original message |
1. K & R |
Outstanding work --well done!
This needs to be sent to every member of congress-more than once. One minor quibble-minor mispellings and inappropriate word usage need to be cleaned up, first. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Faux pas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 03:45 AM Response to Original message |
2. k & r too |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vanboggie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 04:37 AM Response to Original message |
3. K&R for the am crowd |
Nicely done and I agree we must inundate the mailboxes of Congress critters with info such as this.
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
autorank (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 08:30 AM Response to Original message |
4. Beautiful...KR |
and when you have some time, here's another count...
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00238.htm">He stole the damn election ... twice OUTSTANDING POST!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Morgana LaFey (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 11:05 AM Response to Original message |
5. Important. Also - are there DU links for Counts 1 and 2 ? |
Edited on Mon Dec-18-06 11:14 AM by Morgana LaFey
K&R
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vyan (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 11:55 AM Response to Reply #5 |
6. Yes... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FlorianM (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 12:17 PM Response to Reply #6 |
7. Roasting Cheney's Nuts: Impeachment Christmas Carols |
I just came across these christmas carols with impeachment lyrics. Hillarious!
www.roasting-cheneys-nuts.com Have fun! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
newyawker99 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 05:50 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. Hi FlorianM!! |
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 05:52 PM Response to Original message |
9. This has been an oustanding series of posts |
There can be no doubt that these people committed the highest of high crimes and misdemanors.
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
focusfan (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 07:10 PM Response to Original message |
10. the s.o.b is only going to get a slap on the wrist |
congress has done said impeachment is off the table.which tells me the s.o.b will get away with his crimes.this really makes me mad too:mad: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Drops_not_Dope (362 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 09:11 PM Response to Original message |
11. War Crimes |
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?Link=/CommitteeDocs/2006/20060606_Ejdoc162006PartII-FINAL.htm
Table of Contents: 1. Are human rights little more than a fairweather option? 1.1. 11 September 2001 1.2. Guantanamo Bay 1.3. Secret CIA prisons in Europe? 1.4. The Council of Europe’s response 1.5. European Parliament 1.6. Rapporteur or investigator? 1.7. Is this an Anti-American exercise? 1.8 Is there any evidence? 2. The global “spider’s web” 2.1. The evolution of the rendition programme 2.2. Components of the spider’s web 2.3. Compiling a database of aircraft movements 2.4. Operations of the spider’s web 2.5. Successive rendition operations and secret detentions 2.6. Detention facilities in Romania and Poland 2.6.1 The case of Romania 2.6.2. The case of Poland 2.7. The human impact of rendition and secret detention 2.7.1. CIA methodology – how a detainee is treated during a rendition 2.7.2. The effects of rendition and secret detention on individuals and families 3. Individual case studies 3.1. Khaled El-Masri 3.1.1. The individual account of Khaled El-Masri 3.1.2. Elements of corroboration for Mr. El-Masri’s account 3.1.3. The role of "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" 3.1.3.1. The ‘official line’ of the authorities 3.1.3.2. Further elements 3.2. "The Algerian Six" 3.3. Ahmed Agiza and Mohammed Alzery (El Zari) 3.4. Abu Omar 3.5. Bisher Al-Rawi and Jamil El-Banna 3.6. Maher Arar 3.7. Messrs Bashmila and Ali Qaru 3.8. Mohammed Zammar 3.9. Binyam Mohamed al Habashi 4. Secret places of detention 4.1. Satellite photographs 4.2. Documented aircraft movements 4.3. Witness accounts 4.4. Evaluation 5. Secret detentions in the Chechen Republic 5.1. The work of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) 5.2. Damning recent accounts by witnesses 6. The attitude of governments 7. Individual cases: judicial proceedings in progress 7.1. A positive example: the Milan public prosecutor's office (Abu Omar case) 7.2. A matter requiring further attention: the Munich (El-Masri case) and Zweibrücken (Abu Omar case) public prosecutors' offices 7.3. Another matter requiring further attention: the Al Rawi and El Banna case 7.4. Sweden: what next in the Agiza and Alzery case? 7.5. Spain 7.6. Mr El-Masri’s complaint in the United States 8. Parliamentary investigations 8.1. Germany 8.2 The United Kingdom 8.3. Poland: a parliamentary inquiry, carried out in secret 8.4. Romania and "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia": no parliamentary inquiries 9. Commitment to combating terrorism 9.1. Fight against terrorism: an absolute necessity 9.2. The strength of unity and of the law 10. Legal perspectives 10.1. The United States’ legal position 10.2. The point of view of the Council of Europe 10.2.1. The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) 10.2.2 The Secretary General of the Council of Europe (Article 52 ECHR) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Imagevision (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 09:16 PM Response to Original message |
12. Senator Levin heading investigation into leadup to Iraq war and this time |
Bush will ordered to testify under oath without Cheney in the room using only his personal attorney.
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Erika (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 12:09 AM Response to Original message |
13. Keith Olbermann could do a great special comment |
on this material.
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Wed May 01st 2024, 08:21 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC