Tag Archives: Torture

Activist Judges – Pt. 911

The long process of scraping the Chimperor’s shit off the Constitution continues (via The Washington Post):

The judge in the first American war crimes trial since World War II barred evidence on Monday that interrogators obtained from [ Salim Ahmed Hamdan] Osama bin Laden’s driver, ruling he was subjected to “highly coercive” conditions in Afghanistan.

Bu-bu- Jack Bauer couldn’t save the day if he didn’t torture the bad guys!

In addition to the other interrogations, the judge said he would throw out statements whenever a government witness is unavailable to vouch for the questioners’ tactics.

O, who will protect us from the mad chauffeurs of the world?

While I’m glad that people who don’t wet their pants when a car backfires are pushing back against this, I will be forever angry that they had to push back in the first place.


Comments Off on Activist Judges – Pt. 911

Filed under Military, The War Against Terror

“Taint Problem”

Your attention please. If you are surprised by this, please smack yourself between the eyes with a ball peen hammer (via The Washington Post):

Five years ago, as troubling reports emerged about the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a career lawyer at the Justice Department began a long and relatively lonely campaign to alert top Bush administration officials to a strategy he considered “wrongheaded.” [Wrongheaded? – ed.]

Bruce C. Swartz, a criminal division deputy in charge of international issues, repeatedly questioned the effectiveness of harsh interrogation tactics at White House meetings of a special group formed to decide detainee matters, with representatives present from the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA.

Swartz warned that the abuse of Guantanamo inmates would do “grave damage” to the country’s reputation and to its law enforcement record, according to an investigative audit released earlier this week by the Justice Department’s inspector general. [Emphasis added].

O.K. I know these stunning revelations have been neither stunning nor revelations for a while. What I really don’t get is why people keep quavering “What will the neighbors think?” in response to torture. Jesus Para Sailing Christ, whatever happened to “It’s fucking wrong!” in response to torture? Nope, in BushCoVille, everything, every single damn thing has to be run through the filter of “Why should I?” and “What’s in it for me?” and “Heh!”

Perhaps Pasquale D’Amuro, who at the time was the FBI’s assistant director for counterterrorism and has since wound up in the gutter, gets it:

D’Amuro told the investigators that he protested the tactics at a meeting with Mueller at the time, an account confirmed by his colleagues. D’Amuro stated that such aggressive interrogation techniques would not be effective, that they would impede the ability of FBI agents to appear as witnesses at trials, and that the tactics would blacken the country’s reputation by helping al-Qaeda spread negative views.

D’Amuro recognized that the bureau would have a “taint problem” if the FBI did the interviews after the CIA had used its aggressive approaches, the report said. Mueller subsequently decided that the FBI agents would not go back to the sessions.

Silly me.

1 Comment

Filed under Misguided Self-justification, The War Against Terror

Fuck Yoo

Can we pass a law that prohibits pants staining cowards from holding any sort of elected or appointed position in our government? (Via The Washington Post):

“If a government defendant were to harm an enemy combatant during an interrogation in a manner that might arguably violate a criminal prohibition, he would be doing so in order to prevent further attacks on the United States by the al Qaeda terrorist network,” [John C. Yoo, former deputy in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel and over sized bed-wetter] wrote in the memo. “In that case, we believe that he could argue that the executive branch’s constitutional authority to protect the nation from attack justified his actions.”

Interrogators who harmed a prisoner also would be protected by a “national and international version of the right to self-defense,” Yoo wrote.

So, if I believe some knobgobbling lackey is aiding and abetting in the destruction of this country’s founding principles, I get to crush his testicles under the doctrine of national self-defense, right Johnny? Of course, you’re safe because you don’t have any.

I should note that this memo is available due to some non-fail:

The newly released memo was sent by the Justice Department late today to lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who have long pushed for its declassification.


“And so then, Satan says to me … “

Comments Off on Fuck Yoo

Filed under Misguided Self-justification, The War Against Terror