Independent Asset Acquisition

I could decide that my economic situation was dire and that I didn't have the time or inclination to do the hard work to earn my way out of my predicament.

So, I could then go out and get a couple of lawyers friends to write a 'legal opinion' for me that could serve as my justification for my actions, It could be claiming that Independent Asset Acquisition and the use of threatening negation tactics while in the process of Asset Acquisition was perfectly acceptable if my situation was dire enough.

Then, I could try to use this justification and walk into my nearest Bank of America with an AK-47 and demand all the cash in the joint.

That doesn't mean it isn't bank robbery and I won't soon be going to jail.

It seems that some in the Bush Administration thought that something like this should work. They said, lets just claim it isn't torture (despite that fact that we convicted Japanese soldiers for doing precisely this), and bippity bobbity boo, it perfectly OK.

I am still amazed that our national press has not yet wised up to that fact that simply calling torture "harsh interrogation techniques" doesn't somehow make it not be torture, or make its use in any way legal.

About 60 years ago we sent men to jail, and executed a few, for these actions, about the same time we wrote and signed a treaty making these actions an international crime, 35 years ago we denounced other nations for engaging in like behavior, and after all of the time and effort demanding proper behavior from the other nations of the world, we have folks that pretend that by changing what we call torture, we have somehow made it legal and acceptable.

I am sorry, but that is simply wrong, on about every level.

And one other note to the Obama Administration;
Following World War II we made it clear to Captured War Criminals, even the low ranking ones, that just following orders is no excuse for engaging in torture and other war crimes. Assuring those who actually preformed the acts of torture for our nation that they are clear of legal responsibility is not a great way to uphold this standard of behavior. Just a stray thought.


Tags
Torture

How Very Inquisitional Of Us.

One of the many interesting details about the inquisition was how torture was used. There were strict rules in place to control the whole process. One of those was a confession under torture could not be accepted until affirmed by the suspect while they were not being tortured.



It appears that the Bush Administration is following similar rules.

FBI and military interrogators who began work with the suspects in late 2006 called themselves the "Clean Team," and set as their goal collecting of virtually the same information the CIA had obtained from five of the six through duress at secret prisons.

Tags
Bush Administrtion, Torture, TWAT

Why All The Rush To Embrace Inhumanity

The last couple of weeks has been quite fascinating. We have politicians of all types who appear eager to embrace inhumanity and what are quite likely highly illegal actions.

We have a flock Republican Presidential candidates who all want to be seen as the next Jack Bauer. One, Rudy Giuliani, going as far as to try to tie police questioning that he oversaw, with the torture our government is now employing. We have a confirmation mating dance in DC, where all parties are afraid to talk plainly about the subject, and instead chose to focus of what 'is' is. The President still foolishly parrots his false claim that the US doesn't torture. He apparently thinks that if he redefines torture to remove from the list all the acts of torture we want to use, we are not torturing.

Everyone is acting like the issue of the propriety and legality of waterboarding (and other unnamed forms of torture) is in question. Well, it is not. The US has viewed this act as illegal for over 100 years. In the past, the US has denounce other governments for using this, and other forms of torture. We have prosecuted war criminals who have used waterboarding to question captives.

And now we seem to be trying to claim that this act is no longer torture.

Another way to look at this is to consider the company you keep. Who else is known to have embraced the use of water boarding? Well, Japan during WWII, North Vietnam and the Vietcong , The Stalin's KGB, Pol Pot of Killing Fields fame, and now George Bush.

In the next day or two, more names can be added to the list of those who think torture is an acceptable way of doing business. Including a number of Democratic Senators and of couse both Senators from South Carolina. DeMint, who is a reliable vote for Bush, and Graham, who knows better, but lacks the courage to do the right thing. When Mukasey is approved as AG, those who vote to install him are also voting to approve the use of torture. In his confirmation it was made very clear the he is also willing to twist the law to allow us to try to redefine torture, and allow its continued use.

And, no matter what our politicians do, no matter how they justify it, how they redefine it, no matter how much makeup they apply, it is still torture. Keith Oberman again nails the truth, and the disgustingly viable reasons for Mukasey nomination, and acceptance.


Dispatches From The Culture Wars also touches upon this theme.