Comments on: Obama, The Crawford Torture Admission & The Army Field Manual Lie

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:37:58 +0000

No technique or protocol.

By: Mary

Mary — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:53:54 +0000

70 – that’s good news on the “better quality of lawyer” front for the administration, not super great news for “prosecute the prior administration criminals” front, since he believes in OLC powers of absolution.

By: Mary

Mary — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:52:09 +0000

67 - I understand. And a lot of the issues have to do with the fact that the military is being used in so many settings as a police power and charged with doing things that are not a part of what should be its nomral functioning, so how much you change some of it would be completely dependent on how it is perceived that we are going to use the military over the successive years. Unfortunately, I think it’s going to continue to be used as a quasi-police power, but with with judge/jury/executioner status over civilians within the scope of that power, for a long time.

But you have to break the problems down into the components and I think this post is great for that purpose and deals with one of the biggest, most important of the pieces.

By: JohnLopresti

JohnLopresti — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:18:23 +0000

I think several academics during Rumsfeld’s DoD tenure in the departing administration documented the bureaucratic processes which were the field manual, its addenda, and the existence of secret chapters. The FBI IG report mentioned some of those amendment processes. At one juncture during the DTA, MCA congressional processes I recall one academic stating there was no contemporary online source of the actual manual. Maybe the textbooks will call that the muddle defense when the chronicles are written. Except for the rare project by a substantial news entity, very few news reports list more than tagline pseudopithy statements to exculpate what seems to be emerging to have been a much more mundane plodding and formal revisionism on a scale reminiscent of some sinosoviet historical documents I studied a while back; the 2008 executive summary redacted at 19 pp from the Senate Armed Services Committee, for the unpublished 200+pp. report itself, was the closest approximation I have seen to a congressional understanding of the torture paradigm the administration deployed as policy. There are several court cases that have attempted to pry open the dynamics of the processes by which even the field manual was shifting content, depending upon requester; I think two such cases have been one known as Padilla v Yoo, and the other was defendant’s MTD in US Distr CT SD-FL in re USA v Padilla (2007). Maybe the court cases such as these will arrive at naught. My sense is a lot of the laborious work is at the tiers below top appointee, which accentuates the importance of balanced nominations to effectuate change at that subliminal level. If MartyLederman, and congressman Panetta can provide leadership reinforcement to extirpate the surreptitious processes that juiced the field manual, government will be stronger for the effort. But Kyle Sampson had access to the vendingmachine with the gum, and distributed it widely in the now exiting administration. Congress may opt to see it and ungum the works, with voters’ help. Sometimes the military’s own historians do well with their own recordkeeping, but I am not sure the outcomes are much better. Reading Levin McCain on the Armed Services hearings about rendition and the memos that were its shield is a lot more modern prose than noble Winthrop prose discussing martial law during the US postrevolution epochs [large file]. I guess the fairest way of reading the sources is in combination and with plenty of contrasting of their renditions of history.

By: Valtin

Valtin — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:03:42 +0000

Thanks, it’s a real pleasure to be here, especially since the level of thought by the commenters is so high and sophisticated (and this compliment is meant to everyone here).

By: Valtin

Valtin — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:00:04 +0000

You are correct, Mary. And I hope no one gets the idea that simply changing Appendix M will be sufficient. Or even that yet another rewrite of interrogation procedures will be enough. For instance, the military has no control over the habeas ban.

By: Valtin

Valtin — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:57:07 +0000

The AFM does allow sleep deprivation (4 hrs sleep per night for up to 30 days, with extensions possible). It gives no limitation to hrs of interrogation. It does allow for environmental manipulation of heat and cold, and changes of cell, as long as these are not deemed “excessive”. I noted in my original article: why is a section on a supposedly “single technique” like “separation” mentioning environmental deprivation, etc.

From the original article (linked in bmaz’s article):

The AFM’s Appendix M makes a lot of noise about forbidding sensory deprivation, then provides a definition of same that would describe none but the most extreme examples of sensory deprivation, all the while allowing its practice upon prisoners. Similarly, the document claims it is consistent with the Geneva Conventions and other human rights documents. It denies that prisoners held under separation will be treated to “excessive noise,” “excessive dampness” or “excessive or inadequate heat, light or ventilation.” But rather than appear convincing, these caveats seem to direct the interrogation team to just those kinds of procedures that should be used, as long as it is not judged “excessive.”

By: 4jkb4ia

4jkb4ia — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:39:44 +0000

Otherwise stunnedly happy column from the St. Louis perspective

By: 4jkb4ia

4jkb4ia — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:38:46 +0000

Excellent post.

(Irresistible)
Bernie Miklasz: And yes, the Arizona Cardinals really are heading to the Super Bowl.

This is akin to saying that the Chicago Cubs are nine innings away from winning the World Series.

By: WilliamOckham

WilliamOckham — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:59:48 +0000

Here’s some good news from Politico:

Georgetown source forwards over an email from that school’s administration, reporting that Professor Marty Lederman’s class will be canceled — because he’s joining the Obama administration.