The Torturer's Apprentice (Bush’s legal jeopardy)

[ProSense]

The Torturer's Apprentice

Ray McGovern
September 07, 2006

Snip...

Addressing the use of torture Wednesday, President George W. Bush played to the baser instincts of Americans as he strained to turn his violation of national and international law into Exhibit A on how “tough” he is on terrorists. His tour de force brought to mind the charge the Athenians leveled at Socrates—making the worse case appear the better. Bush’s remarks made it abundantly clear, though, that he is not about to take the hemlock.

As the fifth anniversary of 9/11 approaches and with the midterm elections just two months away, the president's speechwriters succeeded in making a silk purse out of the sow’s ear of torture. The artful offensive will succeed if—but only if—the mainstream media is as cowed, and the American people as dumb, as the president thinks they are. Arguably a war criminal under international law and a capital-crime felon under U.S. criminal law, Bush’s legal jeopardy is even clearer than when he went AWOL during the Vietnam War. And this time, his father will not be able to fix it.

Bush in jeopardy? Yes. The issue is torture, which George W. Bush authorized in a Feb. 7, 2002, memorandum in contravention both of the Geneva Accords and 18 U.S. Code 2441—the War Crimes Act that incorporates the Geneva provisions into the federal criminal code which was approved by a Republican-led Congress in 1996. Heeding the advice of Vice President Dick Cheney’s counsel, David Addington, then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, the president officially opened the door to torture in that memorandum. His remarks yesterday reflect the determination of Cheney and Bush to keep that door open and accuse those who would close it of being "soft on terrorists."

The administration released that damning memorandum in the spring of 2004 after the photos of torture at Abu Graib were published. It provided the basis for talking points that the president wanted “humane” treatment for captured al-Qaida and Taliban individuals. And—surprise, surprise— mainstream journalists like those of The New York Times swallowed the bait, clinging safely to the talking points and missing altogether Bush’s remarkable claim that “military necessity” trumps humane treatment. That assertion, over the president’s signature, provided the gaping loophole through which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and then-CIA Director George Tenet drove the Mack truck of officially-sanctioned torture.

Using the arguments adduced by the Addington/Gonzales/Bybee team, Bush’s 2002 memo made the point that the bedrock provision of Geneva—Common Article 3—does not apply to al-Qaida or Taliban detainees, but that the U.S. would “continue to treat detainees humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva.” (Emphasis added.)

www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/07/the_torturers_apprentice.php|more...

Military's top lawyers denounce Bush on torture:

Also sounding alarms on Bush's legislation Thursday were the Pentagon's top uniformed lawyers. Testifying before a House panel, the service's judge advocate generals said the plan could violate treaty obligations and make U.S. troops vulnerable.

``While we seek that balance'' of fairness and security, ``we also must remember the concept of reciprocity,'' said Brig. Gen. James Walker, staff judge advocate for the Marine Corps. ``What we do and how we treat these individuals can, in the future, have a direct impact on our service men and women overseas. ``

The president's legislation would authorize the defense secretary to convene military tribunals to prosecute terrorism suspects and omit rights common in military and civil courts, such as the defendant's right to access all evidence and a ban on coerced testimony. Bush has said the plan is both fair and tough enough to ensure dangerous terrorists can be brought to justice.

Snip...

But the service's top lawyers reiterated their position that other alternatives must be explored - or the case dropped.

``I believe the accused should see that evidence,'' said Maj. Gen. Scott Black, the Army's judge advocate general.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6065810,00.html

[Fridays Child]

1. k/r

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. jr is a mad man who has been allowed to run amok because he

rules a nation that doesn't care about anything but church, budweiser, nascar and cable tv. They would probably keep electing the bastard until kingdom come, because they don't even know what the fuck he is doing.

[mike_c]

3. GWB makes me proud to be "soft on terrorists...."

Let's make this clear-- I believe that if gov't denies due process to the worst among us, that is only a short step away from denying it to all of us. If the gov't withholds fundamental human rights from those accused of any crime, then we are all in danger of losing our rights. When we allow anyone to be tortured in our names, we are the torturers. When we surrender our principles, we lose everything.

[calimary]

4. Visualize IMPEACHMENT... and then some:

Maybe bush, gonzales, bybee, cheney, and addington (and rove, too, for good measure) - all dolled up in orange jumpsuits?

They're making us all look terrible. How 'bout we make THEM look WORSE?

[madrchsod]

5. when ,god forbid, an american soldier get captured

he or she can be tortured and even killed and there is nothing we can do because we do not abide by any rules of conduct.
tens of thousands of good men and women fought and died to up hold the rules of the treatment of prisoners in the time of war and now their sacrifice was in vain.

[ProSense]

6. Poll: investigating the Bush administration

"Based on what you have read or heard, do you believe that President Bush should be impeached and removed from office, or don't you feel that way?"

8/30 - 9/2/06

Should Be 30%
Should Not Be 69%
Unsure 1%

http://www.pollingreport.com/bush.htm

With an investigation the should be would likely climb to over 60%. The punishment, well, we'll see.