94 Men-Never Identified-Guilty Without A Trial-Tortured & Disappeared-Obama MUST Prosecute.

[kpete]

6: The 94 “ghost prisoners”

Another disturbing revelation of Bradbury’s May 2005 memos was the disclosure of the number of prisoners held in secret CIA custody — 94 in total — and the additional note that the agency “has employed enhanced techniques to varying degrees in the interrogations of 28 of these detainees.” What’s disturbing is not the number — CIA director Michael Hayden admitted in July 2007 that the CIA had detained fewer than 100 people at secret facilities abroad since 2002 — but the insight that this exact figure provides into the supremely secretive world of “extraordinary rendition” and secret prisons that exists beyond the cases of the 14 “high-value detainees” who were transferred to Guantánamo from secret CIA custody in September 2006.

It’s unlikely that the Obama administration intended to highlight the case of these other prisoners — who can rightly be regarded as “America’s Disappeared” — but it’s clear that, although their existence was barely mentioned in the mainstream media, the revelation of this official figure will only lead to calls for the administration to explain what happened to the other 80 prisoners.

....................

10: Barack Obama must prosecute the torturers

Just as those who commit terrorist atrocities are criminals, and not warriors in a “Global War on Terror,” those who approve the use of torture — whatever its supposed rationale — are also criminals. Unlike Steven Bradbury, and John Yoo and Jay Bybee before him, law-abiding citizens will recognize that the newly released memos provide a glimpse into a horrendous world that “shocks the conscience,” in which torture seems to have become an end in itself, and in which 94 men — most of whom have never even been identified — were judged to be guilty without a trial, were tortured and have since disappeared, their whereabouts unknown.

more at:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/42216

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

[dipsydoodle]

2. K & R

If they do nothing the current administration would be guilty of conspiracy.

[Gregorian]

3. The rest of the damning story I've been waiting to hear.

Furthermore, something is bothering a lot. That is, torture and rendition were only minor parts of a far greater picture. One that seems to be all but seen in this discussion. Bush started an illegal invasion. Bush attacked a country that was not an imminent threat. Where is this discussion. Attacking a country is a crime. I'm not saying that we forget about torture, but it seems to me that our focus should be on the bigger picture. Attacking Iraq, for one.

[Pacifist Patriot]

18. I agree.

I'd like to see the U.S. prosecute for the torture program and Bush, Cheney et. al prosecuted at The Hague for the invasion.

[Gregorian]

27. Thank you.

I would even go further back to sanctions. But that seems to have been accepted like it served some kind of good purpose. I cannot believe how complacent the human race is in the face of violence. I'm also as close to a pacifist as one can be. But we have to stop this aggression. I thought that was what the rule of law was about.

I guess it's a war between greed and fear. Which one will win? Stay tuned and find out where the human race goes! I have a hard time laughing when I know how beautiful the world could be.

[Jackpine Radical]

36. I think the difficulty is a psychological one.

A lot of people still, at least on an emotional level, see the invasion of Iraq as retaliation and therefore justified. I wish it weren't so, but I'm afraid the notion that America could do something so fundamentally WRONG is beyond the emotional capabilities of most people to absorb into their worldview. And yes, I can list a lot of things we have done, thoughout history, that were very WRONG. But then I shed my binders a long time ago. You might say they were blown off by a concussion in Vietnam.

[Lars39]

4. Kick and recommend

I knew about the ghost prisoners, but had no idea there were so damn many. :(:grr:

[mike_c]

5. this is the war crime that Bush and his cronies should spend...

...the rest of their lives in prison for. They have much, much more to answer for, but this alone merits the harshest justice.

[Vidar]

6. It gets worse & worse & still no prosecution.

[L. Coyote]

35. And, we are still being kept in the dark!

What we know is the tip of the iceberg.

[struggle4progress]

7. Who remembers the smirking delivery of this line in W's 2003 SOTU address:

All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. Many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: They are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29645

My reaction at the time was that he meant we were snuffing folk in dank little backrooms -- and everything I've learned since supports that initial reaction

[Canuckistanian]

10. The phrase "Let's put it this way..." creeped me out

At that point I knew something really bad had happened.

[DUlover2909]

21. "Let's just put it this way"

Because If I say exactly what was done, well, I might be subject to criminal prosecution. For example, some of these "terrorists" were people that we murdered after we hand-cuffed them and sent them to their detention facilities. We don't really know for sure whether they ever did anything wrong because, well, you know, they never had a lawyer or a trial. We just rounded folks up that had those long beards and spoke the Muslim language. We paid folks over there to bring us other folks that they claimed were terrorists. We just assumed they were terrorists because, well, he-he, we gotta bag somebody, anybody in fact, to make it look like we're doing something. We got some weird Chinese looking fellas. They call themselves weegers or something. Probably some commie Islamist fascist something or other. That's what I mean by "Let's just put it this way." When I said, "no longer a problem," well that doesn't necessarily mean they ever were actually a real problem, but you get the gist.

[Raksha]

23. That's EXACTLY what it means, and anyone who doesn't realize that is in denial.

Re All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. Many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: They are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies.

Or as Stalin put it, "No man, no problem."

[moggie]

42. You know what that reminded me of?

Clemenza's line from The Godfather: "Oh, Paulie... won't see him no more". As if it's not bad enough that the leader of a supposedly civilised nation is having people whacked, he has to swagger about it like a hood: and with the expectation that most of his audience would approve!

[pleah]

8. K&R

[tomp]

9. chill out, the chessmaster-in-chief has got this.

:sarcasm:

[Mark Twain Girl]

37. Probably not a cheerful sign that I wasn't sure if this was sarcasm until I clicked on the post. nt

[PatSeg]

11. To hear Cheney

and other republicans, only THREE people were subjected to "enhanced interrogation"! That's when I want to throw something at the TV.

For everything that is reported, you know there are many more stories that we'll probably never know.

[Baby Snooks]

12. He must?

He doesn't have to do anything. And doesn't intend to. Time to wake up boys and girls. He is not going to do anything.

[jbnow]

13. I know this is serious but "Obama must prosecute"? In his

spare time? Or should he resign as president and ask to be hired into the justice department if his law license is current and valid at that level?

I would guess the AG is looking at this as he is looking into the whole torture issue since killing the prisoner is going beyond the boundaries of the crazy torture memos.
It's good to male our urgent concerns known but there's not a reason to assume the silence from DOJ on this means neglect. It could also mean professionalism.

[rfranklin]

25. So, we can assume that silence from the DOJ is actually....

a cover for busy legal beavers constructing an airtight case against the Bush thugs?

[jmowreader]

29. Exactly...

President Obama knows three things a lot of people here are not acknowledging:

1. The list of felonies the Bush administration committed is very long and very excruciating--you name the crime and SOMEONE in the Bush administration probably committed it. If they decided to reduce the amount of prison space needed for these thugs by not jailing anyone who committed fewer than five felonies, they'd still have to turn loose a lot of pot criminals to make room for them.

2. All these people are rich. IIRC the poorest member of Bush's cabinet was Condi Rice, who is a millionaire. Rich people can afford the best legal representation. The case against these people has to be absolutely perfect. They can't leave a T uncrossed or an I undotted. They can't mispronounce one syllable. The intent is to throw these assholes in prison en masse, not to tie up their cases in appeals court until they all die.

3. And because they're rich, they have the means to fly to a country that has no extradition treaty with the US if they even get a whiff of what Obama plans to do to them. Saudi Arabia would take them. Also, Bush owns that piece of land in Paraguay, and there's no doubt in my mind they could hire freepers to patrol its perimeter carrying loaded guns.

So...the case has to be so airtight it's ridiculous, and it can't even be intimated until the subjects are in federal custody.

President Obama is a smart man, and he's a good lawyer.

[rfranklin]

33. I would settle for them fleeing to another country....

It would be the clearest admission of guilt.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

46. Exactly. The only thing worse than not prosecuting

would be a sloppy prosecution. Be sure Bush, Cheney, and the rest of them are lawyering up for what's coming.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

50. Something like that... n/t

[jbnow]

53. No, that's why I said we should make our opinions known. Just we also can't

assume that they are ignoring it.
It is good to express what we want, just wrong to curse them at this point.

[snappyturtle]

14. K&R

:kick:

[AzDar]

15. K & R

:kick:

[santamargarita]

16. K&R

Kick

[RedCloud]

17. Pinochet and Bush sitting in a tree...

Seems like similar tactics.

[tekisui]

19. knr!~

[localroger]

20. Not so sure

It’s unlikely that the Obama administration intended to highlight the case of these other prisoners

Really? Obama chose to release the memos unredacted. I think highlighting these cases is exactly what he intended. He knows that if he moves directly he will alienate the CIA and that's something he can't afford. But he has let the information out, so that we yell in his ear about it. From Obama's perspective I think that is not a bug but a feature. Bush kept a tight lid on this stuff, Obama is letting the room fill with smoke. And with enough of that he can go to the CIA and say, I'm not behind this but there's a lot of pressure and something has to be done, and maybe something will get done and he won't end up getting sandbagged like Jimmy Carter.

To the sarcastic comment above, Obama isn't a chessmaster, he is a poker player. Really -- and by most accounts a damn good one. Chess is not about when to reveal information, but poker is, and Obama has so far played the Presidential game better than I ever thought possible. For every thing he's not moving on that I'd rather he did, I can see a plausible argument that if he did move on it it wouldn't get done anyway because there's too much opposition or it would cost too much. So on those things he's laying groundwork, including little things like leaving this line in this released memo. On things where he has the capital to succeed he has moved. And I expect him to continue doing that, moving in the future on things he's "slighting" today because if he moved today he knows he would fail. He is getting us to do what FDR once asked, paraphrasing, "OK we know this needs to be done, now it's up to you to make me do it."

[brindis_desala]

24. Finally someone around here gets it. What the complainers

constantly forget is that Bush was only able to float the law because he had judicial and congressional enablers. We are thankfully NOT (yet) a dictatorship. That does not mean that we have enough officials in high places with sufficient integrity and stature to mend the breach in our checks and balances.

[glitch]

26. The judicial housecleaning needs to be job #1, and my hope is it's going on quietly

even as we speak.

[brindis_desala]

31. Precisely. And not a day goes by I do wish that Thurgood Marshall,

giant that he was, had possessed the unselfishness and farsightedness of David Souter.

[glitch]

32. Give him a break, he retired at age 82 and died two years later.

January 24, 1993. I suppose he could have done a Rehnquist and phoned it in those final two years and made it under the wire for Clinton to nominate his replacement.

But I think it's really our responsiblity to not allow Bushes to be elected in the first place, and let our best retire in peace when they are ready.

[brindis_desala]

34. The "we" you deem to rely on are not nearly so numerous as you may think.

[glitch]

51. You're probably right.

I just think we chew up our heroes badly enough as it is!

[Jackpine Radical]

38. I'm really taken with the poker metaphor.

Excellent--a game based on timing the release of information. And, of course, things like knowing which hands are strong enough to put money on, and being able to read your opponents.

[Gregorian]

39. i think you're dead on. Also, I think Obama gave us a hint.

When he talked about not prosecuting some for torturing, I believe he was sending a message to us, the people. That message being, when he switched to being for prosecution (whether or not that is within his ability) it was to say that he would be playing this hand again. A hint that when he says things we don't want to hear, we should be able to be patient and read a little into his intentions.

[malaise]

40. Excellent post n/t

[moggie]

45. If you can see this, don't you think the CIA will too?

And with enough of that he can go to the CIA and say, I'm not behind this but there's a lot of pressure and something has to be done

The CIA will certainly be well aware of the theory that this is what Obama's up to - and they know him better than you or I. And if moves are made against them, they won't naively buy the line that the president has nothing to do with this. They'll hold him responsible, if for no other reason than that the knowledge that they will do so will be a strong incentive for him to ensure that they suffer little or no real consequences.

[bertman]

48. Of course they're aware of his strategy. That's why he went directly to them after he had

said they would not be prosecuted for following orders they were told by Justice were legal orders. That was a preemptive move to gain the support of the rank and file of the agency. And, I believe, a very good, strategic decision on his part.

Whatever you or I may think of the CIA, in this case, they were acting under orders of the President--orders that his legal team at Justice had made sure were couched in terms that gave them authenticity and validity.

[juno jones]

22. K&R! n/t

[winyanstaz]

28. This must not be allowed to be "disappeared"

"94 men — most of whom have never even been identified — were judged to be guilty without a trial, were tortured and have since disappeared, their whereabouts unknown."

Who are they? Old enemies or old lovers? Terrorists or patriots? Americans or ??? Where are the bodies? If the CIA did it..they know where they are. Are these men that did 9-11? Witnesses to crimes?

Murder most horrid must not be allowed to go on. 94 ghosts demand some attention. We, the citizens must be their voice.

Do not let them fade quietly into the night.

Hopefully Obama will now appoint a real judge to the supreme court and maybe a few more as well.

This just makes me weep for my Nation.

[Amonester]

30. The Bush Regime "disapeared" human beings like the Pinochet Regime

"disapeared" human beings.

The same types of crimes deserve the same types of punishments, otherwise Justice is not served equally.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

[EFerrari]

41. We still don't know where dozens of these men are. n/t

[yardwork]

43. I agree.

[ooglymoogly]

44. KR with extreme disgust. nt

[K Gardner]

47. The MSM wants us to think there were only "two" victims. That's why those are the only two

names we ever hear in connection.

The rest remain faceless, nameless victims. This HAS to get out, the story HAS to be told in its entireity. And everyone in the nation should be made to watch "Rendition".

Disgusting.

[Dragonfli]

49. K&R

[DutchLiberal]

52. "Disappeared prisoners"? Wow. Pinochet flashback.