|
|
Bush okayed marteling aan de advocaten van de outwitdefensie
Vrijdag, 30 Januari, 2009
Door Stephen C. Webster Het komt als geen verrassing dat het beleid van Bush weinig liefde voor advocaten had. Long before ontwikkelde het „Attorneygate“ schandaal zich rond het vuren van negen Procureurs van de V.S. op zijn tweede termijn, vroegere President George W. Bush bracht een goede hoeveelheid tijd door die proefadvocaten bashing wanneer hij de kans had. En het was enkel onlangs geopenbaard die aangestelde Bradley Schlozman van Bush, die burgerrechten en stemrechtadvocaten vanaf 2003 tot 2006 controleerde, gedacht zijn lasten was klein meer dan een bos van „vormsporen,“ „commies“ en „gekke libs.“ Maar nu, in een hoofdartikel van de Donderdag dat door wordt gepubliceerd Wall Street Journal, Verklaarde John Yoo, de vroegere HulpProcureur van de Afgevaardigde Algemeen voor het Bureau van Wettelijk Advies, dat de de martelingsprogramma's van het beleid van Bush, waarvoor hij mede gecreëerd de wettelijke rechtvaardigingen, aanvankelijk aan procureurs van de outwit de geslepen defensie werd ontworpen. Het „eerste ding om het even welke advocaat zal doen is vertelt zijn cliënten op te sluiten,“ Yoo schrijft. „[Khalid Sjeik Mohammeds] of Abu Zubaydahs van de toekomst zal aan geen het mondeling vragen of bedrog antwoorden - die precies waarom het beleid van Bush zijn voelde dat wordt gedwongen om meer dwangmaatregelen in de eerste plaats te gebruiken.“ Yoo veronachtzaamt te vermelden, echter, dat vóór het Opperste binnen gestapte Hof, de verschrikkingsgedaagden militaire advocaten gebruikten. Noch vermeldt hij dat het algemeen van die rechtersverdediger (Punten) voor het Leger, De Luchtmacht en de Marine later „gezegd drukten zij hun zorgen uit aangezien het beleid uit bij het Pentagoon in Maart en April 2003.“ werd gehakt „Hoewel hun brieven aan het algemene advies van de Afdeling van de Defensie geclassificeerd zijn, maakten de bronnen zich vertrouwd met hen bovengenoemd de advocaten ongerust dat de ruim bepaalde, taaie ondervragingstactiek niet alleen al lang bestaande militaire doctrine die - teveel ruimte voor interpretatie door ondervragers verlaat - zou overtreden maar ook openbare verontwaardiging als de tactiek gekend werd,“ Wit Josh schreef voor zou veroorzaken De Washington Post in 2005. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), die de het subcomitéhoorzitting van 2005 Strijdkrachten voorzat, toen vertelde de hoogste militaire advocaten, „als zij aan u van bij het begin hadden geluisterd, zouden wij de heel wat problemen niet hebben die wij.“ hebben behandeld Klaarblijkelijk, luisterde het beleid van Bush nooit aan hen. In his time with the Department of Justice, John Yoo co-authored the Patriot Act and helped craft legal justifications for the Bush administration’s torture programs and the NSA’s full-spectrum spying apparatus. “Relying on the civilian justice system not only robs us of the most effective intelligence tool to avert future attacks, it provides an opportunity for our enemies to obtain intelligence on us,” continued Yoo. “If terrorists are now to be treated as ordinary criminals, their defense lawyers will insist that the government produce in open court all U.S. intelligence on their client along with the methods used by the CIA and NSA to get it. A defendant’s constitutional right to demand the government’s files often forces prosecutors to offer plea bargains to spies rather than risk disclosure of intelligence secrets.” In the piece, titled Obama Made a Rash Decision on Gitmo, Yoo also directly states that President Bush ordered waterboarding “three times” after 9/11. “Mr. Obama is returning America to the failed law enforcement approach to fighting terrorism that prevailed before Sept. 11, 2001,” he opined. Yoo argues Obama’s order banning torture “amounts to requiring — on penalty of prosecution — that CIA interrogators be polite,” and even parrots a Rove talking point: the claim that Obama’s ban of torture somehow “prohibits” good-cop, bad-cop interrogation routines with prisoners. “The Army Field Manual, for example, prohibits you from using good cop-bad cop in interrogating,” Rove said on Fox News’ Hannity on Monday. “The CIA must now conduct interrogations according to the rules of the Army Field Manual, which prohibits coercive techniques, threats and promises, and the good-cop bad-cop routines used in police stations throughout America,” writes Yoo Thursday. Of course, it doesn’t. “In fact, the Army Field Manual explicitly permits good cop-bad cop interrogations under the name of ‘Mutt and Jeff’ interrogations, which involve two interrogators ‘display[ing] opposing personalities and attitudes toward the source,’” reported Media Matters, on the instance of Rove introducing the manufactured “fact.” “The Field Manual says the ‘goal of this technique is to make the source identify with one of the interrogators and thereby establish[ing] rapport and cooperation.’” After stating unequivocally that the new interrogation rules will completely cut off any further intelligence from captured al-Qaeda members, he goes so far as to imply that President Obama is “na?ve.” “It is na?ve to say, as Mr. Obama did in his inaugural speech, that we can ‘reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals,’” opines Yoo. “That high-flying rhetoric means that we must give al-Qaeda — a hardened enemy committed to our destruction — the same rights as garden-variety criminals at the cost of losing critical intelligence about real, future threats.” His opinion seems to be that suspected terrorists should be given no rights, and the government should not be burdened with needing to provide legitimate evidence against the accused. “Zacarias Moussaoui, the only member of the 9/11 cell arrested before the attack, turned his trial into a circus by making such demands,” his screed against the American justice system concludes. “He was convicted after four years of pretrial wrangling only because he chose to plead guilty. Expect more of this, but with far more valuable intelligence at stake.” This, coming from the man who once refused to say whether, under his definition of executive power, the president could order a man buried alive. Speaking with a reporter, Yoo also agreed with an analysis of executive power which posited the hypothetical situation in which Bush might order a boy’s testicles “crushed” in order to affect a response from his parents. On the legality of such an order, Yoo said, “I think it depends on why the president thinks he needs to do that.” “The real reason John Yoo wrote this foolish, inaccurate piece is in the hopes of gathering around him some support for his illegal actions,” writes RAW STORY investigative news editor Larisa Alexandrovna on her blog, at-Largely. “You may wish to read his latest epic verbiage festival, but I would urge you not to waste your time,” she writes. “The man is a liar, a coward, and now defends his illegal actions by using lies and discredited propaganda to justify the unjustifiable.” Ron Brynaert contributed to this report. Have Your Say: Bush okayed torture to outwit defense lawyers Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Related News
|
Gaza victims describe human shield use Last post by Unregistered @ 12:32 AM Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
Can anyone verify this information Last post by Unregistered @ 12:25 AM Exxon notches 45.22 billion dlrs record profit Last post by Unregistered @ 12:08 AM Thais admit they are RACIST BASTARDS! Last post by An American @ 12:04 AM Nixon-Kissinger Celebrated '72 Bombing of N. Vietnam, New Transcripts Show Last post by Unregistered @ 12:00 AM Israel 'fires into Lebanon after rockets' Last post by Unregistered @ 11:56 PM Halliburton Settles Cheney-Era Bribery Probe With U.S Government Last post by loki @ 11:26 PM Letter to Rove Says He Has ?Absolute Immunity? and Can Ignore Subpoena Last post by loki @ 11:25 PM Yoo Suggests He Fixed Law Around Bush Administration's Desire to Torture Last post by loki @ 11:23 PM Gymnist Meets Ball Last post by loki @ 11:21 PM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More Breaking News  Archive
|
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
Loading ...
