Bush admits he tortured. Failure to prosecute make this administration complicit.

[grahamhgreen]

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."

Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.



"I call on all governments to join with the United States and the community of law-abiding nations in prohibiting, investigating, and prosecuting all acts of torture..."


- George W. Bush, June 2003

[FiveGoodMen]

1. Yes, it does.

This admin clearly views itself as just a placeholder for the next puke.

[The Wielding Truth]

2. Could the Hague prosecute now?

http://www.haguejusticeportal.net/

[lsewpershad]

43. Yes

The Hague should take action especially since the O adm seem bent on looking forward .

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. When?

When does it officially become complicit? The day the book is published? A week later? A month later? A year later?

[EFerrari]

7. The day they failed to respond to the UN Rapporteur's admonition

that it's a violation of international law to fail to investigate torture immediately.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. When did the UN Rapporteur admonish the Obama administration?

[EFerrari]

9. It was in the press, Freddie. Sometime early in 2009 or so, iirc.

Obama forced Mowat to speak up by deciding to grant immunity to CIA for torture. Here's one version of the incident.

UN Rapporteur On Torture: Obama’s Pledge Not To Pursue Torture Prosecutions Of CIA Agents Is Not Legal

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/19/obama-violated-int-law/

And again this summer, the UN is again trying to get the US to do something about itself.

UN rights chiefs lead new assault on US
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101027/ts_afp/usattacksguantanamojusticecanadaun_20101027045646

[RainDog]

13. thank you for telling the truth for those who want to claim it's okay if Democrats do it.

it's not.

that's something the cheerleaders can't seem to get through their heads.

for some people, it doesn't matter which team is doing the torture, or which team is enabling it. it's still wrong.

it's still a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

it still makes us a nation of torturers.

it still makes those who are complicit guilty of aiding in human rights abuses.

[EFerrari]

16. One thing that gives me a lot of hope is the ongoing prosecutions

for human rights abuses being conducted more or less vigorously in Latin America. Pinochet and his murderers finally did have to pay. The murderers in Colombia are being pursued. There are other cases ongoing that don't come immediately to mind but reading about them gives me some hope that Bush and his crew of criminals will one day face justice.

[xiamiam]

40. exactly..and complicit because we refuse to prosecute war criminals..nt

[Raksha]

44. Absolutely true!

"It's okay when we do it" ALSO applies to the Democrats. Why this wouldn't be self-evident to everyone is beyond me.

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. So, will it be the responsibility of the NEXT administration to prosecute Bush and Obama?

[EFerrari]

30. There is no statute of limitations on war crimes. n/t

[mdmc]

51. Another voter for President Palin

she will hold their feet to the fire.

[grahamhgreen]

21. Thanks for the links, this section is telling:

"STANDARD: CIA torturers are according to U.S. President Obama not to be prosecuted. Is that decision supportable?

NOWAK: Absolutely not. The United States has, like all other Contracting Parties to the UN Convention Against Torture, committed itself to investigate instances of torture and to prosecute all cases in which credible evidence of torture is found.


Indeed, Article 2 of the convention on torture explains that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever” can be used to legally justify torture. Further, the convention states that an “order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.”

Nowak explained that by invoking the OLC’s memos as justification for the actions of CIA agents against terrorist suspects in U.S. custody, Obama is acting contrary to U.S. obligations under the treaty:



STANDARD: In other words, by making this announcement, Obama has violated international law?

NOWAK: Correct. It is a violation of binding international treaty law in this case, because this is an international law convention — and it provides unequivocally that states are not merely obligated to make torture a crime, but also to prosecute any incidents of which credible evidence can be found.

[Bluebear]

36. +

[Solly Mack]

46. and it was posted on DU, in multiple threads, by different people

[EFerrari]

14. To be fair, I just read in this article that there is some kind of investigation

ongoing. I don't know its parameters, though:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4608028

[grahamhgreen]

23. If you went on TV and admitted to torturing someone, you would be arrested immediatly,

there really is no need for any other course of action.

On top of that, failure to act by the admin is in itself a crime

[EFerrari]

29. Yes, of course. Although this investigation that I posted about

may cover their behinds as far as the letter of the law, which is to initiate an investigation.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

4. Yup.

We are sheilding war criminals. Just when I htough we couldn't get any more disgusting,we do. I hope to god someone, somewhere has the courage to make the case against the criminals -- all of them, regardless of Party.

[dgibby]

5. IIRC,

Spain is looking into bringing charges.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

6. I heard that years ago, too --

but have no idea where they are in the process. :(

[Bluebear]

10. Quick, somebody post a picture of sexay, SEXAY O-man swimming!!

Stat!

[displacedvermoter]

19. And smiling that GORGEOUS smile and getting our backs!

[iamtechus]

11. John Yoo and Jay Bybee are also clearly guilty of conspiring with him.

If the US fails to act, the ICC can charge all three of them (and possibly others?). The ICC could then issue arrest warrants and nab the fuckers if they leave the protection of our borders.

[Supersedeas]

17. that's appointed for life to the Federal Court of Appeals, Judge Jay Bybee to you sir.

[jgraz]

20. And my neighbor, Professor Yoo

I see that guy every once in a while. It's sickening to have this criminal walking around free.

[Supersedeas]

24. gawd, and I think my neighbors are bad....

[jgraz]

25. Yeah, at least they're not international war criminals.

:banghead:

[grahamhgreen]

34. Better check his basement for missing persons...

[Raksha]

50. Wow...aren't you the lucky one!

My neighbors are all great people, and not a single war criminal in the bunch as far as I know.

[Celtic Raven]

38. Or they could do as we do

Ignore our borders and simply extraordinary rendition their torturing asses.

Can't say I'd care very much if they got a close up view of what that feels like as they disappear over the horizon in chains.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Yup. Bi-partisanship in action. K&R

[bigwillq]

15. Sad but true.

K and R

[WA98296]

22. And, it is part of the reason there was such a backlash w/voters n/t

[Senator]

26. K&+R

[Bonobo]

27. It is impossible to disagree. The party was over before it got started with that 'oversight'. nt

[maryf]

28. K&R

thanks.

[TheKentuckian]

31. Certainly. Rendition is also complicity but this is nail the door shut complicit

[Kaleva]

32. The Japanese "water cure" isn't the same thing as waterboarding.

The difference between the two is that with waterboarding, one feels like they are drowning while with the water cure, one actually is drowning.

[grahamhgreen]

33. Can we agree any kind of asphyxiation is torture?

[Kaleva]

35. I'm not trying to argue that waterboarding isn't torture.

I'm just saying this statement in the OP isn't factually correct:

"After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. "

The waterboarding the CIA used isn't the same thing as the "water cure" the Japanaese used.

[Dragonfli]

37. Could be charged as accessories, the real problem is why they condone lawlessness

Did Obama forget everything about law or has he just decided it is only for poor people?

[fascisthunter]

39. Yes, Unfortuantely That is How History will Remember This Administration

thanks for destroying the reputation of our party.... sellouts

[StarburstClock]

41. "It's off the table" so sit back and enjoy the Torture Book Tour, brought to you by...

a country so corrupt we just elected known criminals to rule the House. Remember to "look towards the future" and "work together" for "change we can believe in". Yes, we're "moving forward" in doublespeak land, so let partisan sloganeering rule your every thought, buy the product that's been created by propaganda or else we'll have "chaos"!

[Enthusiast]

42. Waterboarding is one of many

acts of torture allowed by the Bush Administration. All were criminal acts. None were justified, ever.

[Poboy]

45. kick

[Solly Mack]

47. The U.S. is legally obligated to prosecute..and not doing so is a violation of

our treaty obligations.

The U.S. wants to pretend that declaring torture over somehow amounts to accountability and should be good enough.

Yet a murderer who kills for 8 years would still be charged for his crimes even if he promised to stop killing people.

So would a rapist, a thief...

Mafia bosses are brought down even if they never pull the trigger....because they gave the order. The only difference between a mafia boss and the Bush administration? The mafia boss is honest.(joke..sorta)

If no one is above the law, as politicians like to claim when they're wanting to be cheered on by a crowd, then there's only one thing to be done...prosecute the Bush administration.

Otherwise, shut the fuck up about the rule of law..stop claiming no one is above the law..and for the sake of all things decent, quit claiming you care about human rights.

[grahamhgreen]

48. Bush wants to be punished....

"I call on all governments to join with the United States and the community of law-abiding nations in prohibiting, investigating, and prosecuting all acts of torture..."


- George W. Bush, June 2003


He knows what he's done.

[Solly Mack]

49. and by his own words.

[RainDog]

52. Too many Americans seem to think "exceptionalism" means

the powerful, and this nation overall, is not liable for crimes that they would hold anyone else responsible for.

This attitude is sickening.

[Solly Mack]

53. Speaking to exceptionalism, I listen to some people speak...

and read what they say - and hear a lot of *torture isn't torture if America does it* thinking ('good guys').....or...*it wasn't AS bad because America did it* (torture by America isn't as bad as torture by any other country...'intentions')

and the two thoughts hinge upon the America as the 'good guys' thinking and 'intentions' (and America, as the 'goody guys', always has the best of 'intentionas')....both rely on the belief in American exceptionalism.

The languages adopted to cloak the war crimes is another example. Exceptionalism makes it easier to buy the lies and the atrocities.


Of course the Bush administration wanted to get away with their crimes by calling torture anything but torture....

.... but the language they adopted (enhanced interrogation techniques) served to appeal to the already existing exceptionalism mentality.

It gave an easy out. See? America doesn't torture - it uses enhanced interrogation techniques...and that's different, so we're still the good guys. Playing on the belief that if America does it, it must be good....because 'good guys' wouldn't do it any other way.

And, as a last resort, even if it crossed the line...America had the best of intentions....and that's where the 'bad apples' bullshit comes in handy...besides, it was just a few 'bad apples'...so it isn't government...it's those few individuals.

And since it isn't government sanctioned torture and just a few 'bad apples', prosecute some 'bad apples' and viola! Evidence of accountability!

The government was acting in 'good faith' and with the best of intentions....those lowly troops went rogue.

Bottom line result being - America is still the good guys...exceptionalism endures.

And I agree...the attitude is sickening.