Friday, April 17, 2009

Center for Constitutional Rights Decries Immunity for Torture

here

CCR Decries Immunity for Torture, Secrecy CONTACT: press@ccrjustice.org (SIGN LETTER at CCRJUSTICE dot org for Special Prosecutor

For those interested in the push for a Special/Independent Prosecutor for US War Crimes under the Bush Administration, besides ccrjustice dot org ALSO keep watching:

ACLU dot org (SIGN LETTER HERE)

Marjorie Cohn dot com

Glenn Greenwald: Salon dot com

Bill of Rights Defense Committee bordc dot org

Democracy Now! dot org

Robert Parry: Consortium News dot com

After Downing Street dot org (David Swanson)

Be sure to read news reports, Op Ed, Comments and reactions from other countries which have lost a number of their citizens, Muslims to US prisons such as Guantanamo and prisons in Iraq, Afghanistan and at black sites around the world.

Look for Press Releases from Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First, International Committee of the Red Cross and One World

Find a number of other web and blog sites and similar concerns in the blogposts below on this site: oneheartforpeace dot blogspot dot com

Find headlines on Rights Groups reaction to the memo and other concerns at positive universe dot com (here are some samples from items today:

Top Stories

CNN: Rights groups criticize CIA immunity on interrogations 2009-04-17 :Amnesty International said the release of the documents was welcome, but condemned the decision to block prosecutions. | "The Department of Justice appears to be offering a get-out-of-jail-free card to individuals who, by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's own estimation, were involved in acts of torture," said executive director Larry Cox. "No civilized definition of 'reasonable' behavior can ever encompass acts of torture. Torture has long been recognized to be a violation of both national and international law, and no single legal opinion, no matter from what source, can change that."

The Public Record: Torture Memos Said CIA Could Use Insects and Severely Beat Detainee 2009-04-17 : CIA interrogators were given legal authorization to slam an alleged "high-value" detainee's head against a wall, place insects inside a “confinement box” to induce fear, and force him to remain awake for 11 consecutive days, according to a closely guarded Aug. 1, 2002 legal memo released publicly by the Justice Department for the first time Thursday.

Salon: Is torture really over? 2009-04-17 : Without a hard look at the Bush administration's torture program, the United States could be condemned to repeat it, no matter what President Obama says.

The National Law Journal: White House Release of Interrogation Memos May Turn Up Heat on 9th Circuit Judge 2009-04-17 : The Obama administration released graphic legal memos Thursday that authorized specific interrogation techniques against CIA-held prisoners in the war on terror.

A differing point of view: here

Salon: A whistle-blower who needs Obama and Holder's protection 2009-04-17 : Thomas Tamm exposed the Bush administration's illegal domestic surveillance. Why is the government still holding a criminal indictment over his head? (and NOT the CIA? Which party is guilty?)

1 comment:

  1. Here's one statement I haven't seen noted anywhere else this morning:

    "Notably, the president left open the possibility of prosecuting those higher up the chain who wrote the opinions and authorized the CIA to use abusive interrogation techniques and torture."

    All the more reason to send those letters and make those phone call for a Special Prosecutor!
    (see blogs here that say ACTION above & below - and/or go to ACLU dot org or Center for Constitutional Rights

    From:

    Human Rights Watch
    April 16, 2009

    (New York) – The release of four US Justice Department memos detailing abusive interrogation techniques authorized for use on terrorism suspects underscores the need for an investigation into those who authorized and conducted torture and other abuse, Human Rights Watch said today.

    “President Obama said there was nothing to gain ‘by laying blame for the past,’” said Stacy Sullivan, counterterrorism advisor at Human Rights Watch. “But prosecuting those responsible for torture is really about ensuring that such crimes don’t happen in the future.”

    In a statement released with the memos, President Barack Obama said that although his administration had repudiated the interrogation techniques authorized by his predecessor, his administration would not prosecute those who “carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice.”

    Notably, the president left open the possibility of prosecuting those higher up the chain who wrote the opinions and authorized the CIA to use abusive interrogation techniques and torture.

    “If the Obama administration is to adhere to the law, it is not enough to ensure that torture does not take place in the future,” said Sullivan. “It must apply the law prohibiting torture to those who violated it in the past.”

    The memos were written by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to provide the legal framework for the CIA’s use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” including “waterboarding,” which has been prosecuted as a war crime in the United States for more than 100 years.

    A 2002 memo detailed the techniques authorized on Abu Zubaida, an alleged al-Qaeda operative whom the CIA believed had information about terrorist operations that were yet to be executed. In addition to “waterboarding” and “walling” (slamming a prisoner into a “flexible false wall”), the techniques included placing Abu Zubaida in a box with what he was told was a stinging insect. The memo provides a legal analysis to justify methods that are on their face torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment banned by US and international law.
    --
    HREA - http:www.hrea.org (free emails available from this service & they're often timely as well as helpful)

    ReplyDelete

As long as there is reasonable courtesy, I will not moderate much if at all -- nor require signing in.