|
|
Vertaal:
              Geen Amnestie voor het Beleid van Bush, zegt de Tegenstanders van de Marteling
Woensdag, 26 November, 2008
Door Ali Gharib | Oordelend door de zeldzame lekken van de overgangsteam, onderzoeken en vervolgingen van Barack Obama van de Nieuwgekozen president van George W. op hoog niveau De het beleidsambtenaren van Bush voor marteling en oorlogsmisdaden zijn een ver vooruitzicht. Maar waarschijnlijk of niet, zal dat geen experts van het debatteren van de kwestie tegenhouden van of die verantwoordelijke ambtenaren zouden moeten verantwoordelijk worden gehouden. Ongeacht of Ondervoorzitter Dick Cheney, de vroegere Secretaresse van Defensie Donald Rumsfeld, of anderen vóór jurys worden gesleept, schijnt één het schitteren verandering absoluut bepaald: Obama bevindt zich ondubbelzinnig tegen marteling, en de praktijk zal waarschijnlijk onder zijn beleid eindigen. „Alhoewel ik in andere voorzitters in het verleden ben teleurgesteld, luister ik, en ik geloof Obama wanneer hij zegt wij niet zullen martelen. Ik denk die,“ bovengenoemde Michael Ratner, de voorzitter van het Centrum voor Constitutionele Rechten essentieel ben. Maar de forswearing controversiële en ruwe ondervragingsmethodes kunnen niet zijn genoeg om de morele hoge grond permanent opnieuw te vestigen die het beleid Obama heeft beloofd om de interactie terug naar van de V.S.' te brengen met de rest van de wereld. Als Obama geen marteling overneemt die, in tegenstelling tot eenvoudig het beëindigen van de praktijk voorkwam, kan de deur voor toekomstige overheidsdiensten worden opengelaten om ruwst van ondervragingstechnieken, bovengenoemde Ratner te doen herleven bij een recent forum op School van de Wet van Georgetown de Universitaire. „Als Obama werkelijk wil ervoor zorgen wij martel niet, moet hij een misdadig onderzoek lanceren,“ bovengenoemde Ratner, de auteur van de Proef van Donald Rumsfeld: Een vervolging door Boek. Hij zei dat de doelstellingen van zulk een onderzoek de gemakkelijk identificeerbare „belangrijkste spelers“ en „hoofden“ in het beleid zouden zijn van Bush dat plannen uitbroedde juridisch ruwe ondervragingsmethodes toe te staan en te rechtvaardigen die de critici zijn marteling, met inbegrip van de controversiële „waterboarding“ gesimuleerde verdrinkingstechniek beweren. Achtervolgd die, bovengenoemde Ratner, zouden high-ranking beleidsambtenaren zoals Cheney, Rumsfeld, en het vroegere Centrale Agentschap belangrijkst George Tenet van de Intelligentie, evenals het wettelijke team omvatten die omhoog trommelde wat nu als onzorgvuldige wettelijke rechtvaardiging voor marteling wordt beschouwd. De zeer belangrijke het beleidsadvocaten van Bush betrokken bij het voorzien van wettelijke dekking aan ruwe praktijken, met inbegrip van het ronduit gekritiseerde „martelingsmemorandum“ van het Bureau van de Afdeling van de Rechtvaardigheid van Wettelijk Advies (OLC), omvatten het vroegere advies Alberto Gonzales van het procureurs algemene en vroegere Witte Huis; De leider van Cheney van personeel en vroeger wettelijk advies aan het bureau David Addington van de ondervoorzitter; and the University of California, Berkeley law professor and former OLC lawyer John Yoo. If the characters behind the questionable techniques are not held accountable for violating U.S. and international laws, said Ratner, presidents after Obama may simply say “well, in the name of national security I can just redo what Obama just put in place. I can go torture again.” Ratner also spoke to the concern that, from the view of the rest of the world, “to not do an investigation and prosecution gives the impression of impunity.” But opposing Ratner on the dais, Stewart Taylor Jr. argued that an investigation and prosecution were not appropriate. “The people who are called ‘war criminals’ by [Ratner] and others do not think they acted with impunity,” said Taylor, a Brookings Institution fellow and frequent contributor to Newsweek and the National Journal. In the July 21 edition of Newsweek, Taylor called for Bush to preemptively pardon any administration official who could be held to account for torture or war crimes. Taylor’s rationale was that without fear of prosecution, a full and true account of what he called “dark deeds” could never come to light. Furthermore, at the Georgetown Law event Taylor said investigation and eventual prosecution would “tear the country apart.” That may be the thinking of Obama, who, in addition to hints he wouldn’t investigate Bush administration malfeasance, declared his intention to govern as a political reconciliation president in his election victory speech. In Grant Park in Chicago on Nov. 4, Obama rehashed a quote from slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., but instead of rhetorically bending the “arc of history” toward “justice,” as King did, Obama called for it to be bent “toward the hope of a better day.” But Ratner said that the country was already divided, and that divide is exactly what a future administration could politically exploit to reinstate torture. He said that Obama must close the divide and doing so is not rehashing the past. “You’re making sure that in the future, we don’t torture again,” Ratner said. “This is not looking backward.” Another potential problem with investigation and prosecution, says Taylor, is that the Bush administration officials ostensibly had sought to find out whether the methods they were about to approve were justified, and, indeed, they were told they were in the legal clear. “There is no evidence that high-ranking officials acted with criminal intent,” he said. “They were relying in good faith on the advice of legal counsel.” Taylor said that since the legal advice originated from the Department of Justice, it would be wrong for the same Justice Department to “turn around” and prosecute people for actions that its previous incarnation had explicitly told were legal. But Taylor’s point misses two issues: that the crimes were allegedly given a legal green light because of collusion with the White House, and that Ratner proposes to investigate those same Justice officials who were involved in giving approval. Despite referring to John Yoo as a “gonzo executive imperialist,” Taylor said that “those officials, like them or not, were honorably motivated” because they were “desperately afraid” of another terrorist attack. Ratner insists that the officials, part of a “group, cabal, or conspiracy,” may be culpable because they were “aiders and abettors.” “[OLC] was not giving independent counsel,” insisted Ratner. “They were shaping memos to fit a policy that had already been determined.” And while Taylor was quick to point out that many U.S. administrations had been accused of war crimes by various sources, Ratner replied that it was the first time that any administration had actually “assaulted the prohibition on torture.” That could be one reason why, if the U.S. does not take care of its own house, Bush administration officials will likely be pursued on charges in Europe and elsewhere. In international courts, said Ratner, those officials will not be able to hide behind the legal shields of internal government memos or executive decrees. “They have no defense in international law,” he said. “They’re finished.” (Inter Press Service) Have Your Say: No Amnesty for Bush Administration, Say Torture Opponents Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Related News
|
Blairwatch: The Blair Years and the war crimes tribunal - UPDATED Last post by Regina @ 10:29 PM Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
Press TV - Tony Blair under investigation for war crimes Last post by Unregistered @ 10:00 PM Afghanistan war an ?8bn disaster Last post by Unregistered @ 09:20 PM Obama plans 20,000 troop surge to boost Afghan Sacrifice Last post by Unregistered @ 09:16 PM Woolworths enters administration Last post by Unregistered @ 09:02 PM Chinese workers Rebel Last post by Unregistered @ 09:01 PM Law Lords block "Fasicst Pig Filth" bid to stop critical mass cyclists Last post by Unregistered @ 08:46 PM Beacon of hope Last post by Thinking Man's Idiot @ 08:18 PM Larry Silverstein LOST MONEY on 911 Last post by Unregistered @ 08:13 PM An American Eviction Story Last post by Thinking Man's Idiot @ 08:12 PM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More World 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 ...
