One of the defenses that John Yoo and Jay Bybee made in response to the OPR Report with which I’m sympathetic is the argument that, if they are going to be held accountable, so should all the other Executive Branch lawyers who approved of torture. Jay Bybee even included a pretty little graph of all the other lawyers who approved torture (I’ve excerpted the list at the end of the post).
To support his case that everyone in the Bush Administration signed off on this torture, Bybee included extensive descriptions of the approval top Bushies gave to torture (though he admittedly seems to have forgotten to include Cheney and Addington–maybe that has something to do with the defense fund that got set up around the time this letter got drafted).
There are the meetings during the drafting of the memo, during which Condi and Hadley and Gonzales were briefed on Abu Zubaydah’s torture, including the night before the torture memos were signed.
[Bellinger] hosted the initial meeting with OLC and the CIA on April 16, 2002, and assumed responsibility for briefing NSC Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Deputy NSC Advisor Stephen Hadley, and White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales. Report at 40, 42. He continued to attend meetings during the summer (id at 46,61), including the July 13,2002 meeting, where Yoo provided him with a copy of the Memorandum. Id. at 47. Bellinger also attended an NSC meeting with Rice, Hadley, and [Moseman] (CIA Director Tenet’s Chief of Staff) the day before the memos were due, which included a discussion of the proposed interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. Id at 61
Then there were details concerning the July 29, 2003 meeting, attended by Tenet, Muller, Cheney, Condi, Ashcroft, Gonzales, and Bellinger. Though Ashcroft would contest the description of what he said at this meeting, the OPR Report says (Bybee reveals) that Ashcroft strongly endorsed the program’s legality.
Later, at a meeting [redacted] Ashcroft “forcefully reiterated the view of the Department 0f Justice that the techniques employed by CIA were and remain lawful and do not violate either the anti-torture statute or US obligations under the [CAT].” Report at 107-08. At the same meeting. Ashcroft and Philbin gave a “lengthy explanation of the law and the applicable legal principles” regarding the interrogation program. Id at 109. [2 lines redacted] Ashcroft himself “had reviewed and approved them as lawful under US law.”
Most strikingly, Bybee explains that the National Security Council got together on July 2, 2004 to discuss “interrogating” a detainee (who Bybee says is named Janat Gul though note my doubts here).
Deputy Attorney General James Comey. Comey joined Ashcroft at a NSC Principals Meeting on July 2, 2004 to discuss the possible interrogation of CIA detainee Janat Gul. Report at 123. Ashcroft and Comey conferred with Goldsmith after the meeting, leading to Goldsmith’s letter to Muller approving all ofthe techniques described in the Classified Bybee Memo except for the waterboard. Id (PDF 26-27)
As I said, Bybee seems to be focusing on people like Condi and Ashcroft and Bellinger, to the exclusion of people like Cheney (I’ll come back to that). But he does lay out several high level meetings Bush’s top aides–many of them lawyers–attended and did not object to torture.
But note: I’m getting these references from Bybee’s citations of the OPR Report, not from the OPR Report itself. In the publicly released OPR Report, these meetings appear behind page after page of complete redaction.
Much of this information–particularly discussions of Ashcroft’s approval of torture at the July 29, 2003 meeting–have appeared elsewhere (the CIA IG Report and the SSCI narrative include a discussion of that meeting). But in the OPR Report, the discussion of the July 29, 2003 meeting appears in the huge redacted section that extends from PDF 111 to 116.
So why did CIA or DOJ redact all discussion of these meetings approving torture?
If DOJ has decided this was all sloppy but not legally sanctionable, then why is our government still hiding complicity of the torture gang?
Here are the lawyers that appear in Bybee’s pretty little graphic:
- John Ascroft
- Alberto Gonzales
- Larry Thompson
- Jim Comey
- Jay Bybee
- Daniel Levin
- Steven Bradbury
- Michael Chertoff
- Tim Flanigan
- David Addington
- Scott Muller
- John Bellinger
- John Rizzo
- John Yoo
- Patrick Philbin
- (Probably) Jennifer Koester
- Adam Ciongoli



69 Comments




Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Emptywheel
RSS/XML Feed
I’ve been under investigation for more than five years for legal advice that I gave in the immediate wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. This month, the Justice Department’s top career lawyer finally put an end to the
farce.
For a early morning barf go to Philly.com to read twenty+ column inches of Yoo gloating over his vindication.
EW,
Thanks for connecting the dots for us on this. I intend to “Spotlight” your diary just as soon as I get some breakfast and coffee going. You’re a true patriot.
Bob in AZ
Is there any possibility that Kenneth Levin should be added to the torture list? Check here (scroll down to 6).
There is not a lot out there about him: he did facilitate the release of the Nazi War Crimes docs in 2000, but then 9/11 changed everything, and in 2005 he appears to think rendition is O.K. I notice that if one uses “Ken Levit” one comes up with one less letter than John Rizzo for the spaces you were looking at a redacted name the other day. Maybe I’m trying to pound a square peg in a round hole too early in the morning. Need coffee,
ew-
you have moved so systematically thru the myriad facts and now you wrap it all up so neatly.
thanks for this remarkable, sustained, determined effort.
I do see Haynes, the top lawyer in DoD. Haynes is in as deep as Addington is.
The lawyer in question has to have been at CIA’s Office of General Counsel in November and December 2002.
It’s my understanding that Addington recruited for the OLC only lawyers who would write opinions that agreed with his and Cheney’s view of the powers of the presidency. Yoo is the Adolf Eichmann of the Bushler regime.
Maybe John Fredman? On October 2, 2002 John Fredman was chief counsel to the CIA’s counter-terrorism center.
http://valtinsblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/minutes-from-torturers-meeting-at.html
What gave Addington the power to decide who got recruited and hired by OLC?
How would he know whether a candidate was willing to write such opinions?
Too long, and this lawyer wouldn’t be in CTC, he’d be in OGC.
Drat. He was apparently
Link.
Back to my French roast.
PBS’ documentary, “Cheney’s War” describes OLC as a ‘mini Supreme Court.’
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/view/
Both Yoo and Koestler were clerks for Clarence Thomas.
Stephen Bradbury and Patrick Philbin, were also clerks for Thomas.
And another Thomas clerk’s work, James Ho, turns up in a footnote in the Bybee/Too torture memos, according to this post, having authored theitem while serving a “stint” in OLC (aka the Finishing School for the Elect). Ho went on to work for John Cornyn and is now Texas Solicitor General. (Has Ho’s name popped up before?)
I wonder if any members of the “Mini Supreme Court” queried Justice Thomas on any of these matters?
[Also, in Part II (OLC) of Cheney's War - Yoo says that his team regularly met with other counterpart members of the national security team via SIVITS (secure video telecon). Wondering if any of those recordings still exist?]
LOL
I have one page of the report marked up “Thomas’ revenge,” making just that point.
The danger of having someone like Clarence Thomas approved is not just the damage that he does on the Court, but the damage his clerks do as they populate government. In this case, those clerks eliminated laws on torture.
I hope that old CIA guy Poppy Bush is proud.
You keep out-doing yourself, EW. I’m going to have to find a super-duper thesaurus so I’ll have a refreshed supply of adjectives to use in trying to describe the awesomeness of your work. This one article alone deserves many kudos. Many thanks.
The Torture Gang Enablers: The Entire Obama Administration
I’ll remember, if I’m ever accused of a federal felony, that all I have to do is “forcefully reiterate” my belief that what I did was legal. Those must be the magic words on the get out of jail free card.
Super work! You stand pretty much alone in terms of support for US democracy and accountability in re government “malfeasance by redaction & disinformation.” Thank you.
How many of these legal eagles ever jumped outta a humvee or outta a blackhawk in hostile territory with pockets of fully loaded 30 round magazines?
how many of them every got in a fist fight in grammar school?
IF our justice system was functioning FAIRLY,
ESPECIALLY death penalty cases,
These apologists for a compassionate nazism would have been lined up against a wall several years ago.
rmm.
Why should Poppy not be smugly bursting with pride, along with that veritable army, of both known and unknown “soldiers”, who have successfully, it would appear, hijacked “the law” to their own purposes.
The only blight on their total happiness will be if “the law” does does not simply condone, but also, even glorify what all these many, working in “concert”, even including old Clarence (and, perhaps a few of his supreme cohorts?) toward a single, long-desired aim, have accomplished.
Why would “the law” bite the hand (“unseen” or otherwise) which has it on such a tight, short leash?
Why would Poppy (who was once much concerned about “deep doo doo”) feel anything but swelling pride? Shame does not come naturally to any of his ilk, if history be any guide.
Is Poppy concerned that his beloved CIA will take the hit?
They’ll take it, happily, right on the jaw, if it comes to that.
The power of the CIA is not, thereby diminished, it is strengthened.
The CIA has shown its mettle and loyalty,and thus, what it is, really, made of.
DW
on reflection … IF our justice system worked, then scum like this would have never been admitted to law school, never mind being successful.
I forgot this part of the “justice” system cuz, growing up on welfare in MA., I remember how the connected just about always got away with stuff that us peee-ons got reamed for. When I was 13 in ’73 I spent the summer watching john dean worm and snivel and cry about betraying … whatever.
well, I’m glad that there are honest people out there trying to make it work!
rmm.
(argh! whichever Bybee minion picked that graph font needs to be sent to Format Jail stat.)
Maintaining the “highest standards of professional legal conduct”. Yea. Right.
OK…it’s not any shorter, but the he was in OGC at the correct time:
A. John Radsan, director of the National Security Forum at William Mitchell College of Law, was assistant general counsel at the CIA from 2002-2004.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/05/confirming-cias-legal-eagle.php
Interesting that in the above linked commentary [5/11/07] before John Rizzo’s Senate confirmation hearings, he says [similar to Bybee above][emphasis added]:
BTW, I do see Addington‘s name in the chart [second in third row].
My response above should have been linked to this EW comment…
Rethuglicians have always been “chicken hawks”. Back in my day of jeeps and hueys and 20 round mags they were the same. Like cheney, dodging out of military service simply because they were and remain, cowards. scratch a rethug bully and you will always find, a coward. Authoritarians, at least the american version, are cowards. They cover up their cowardice by being bullys. You can see examples all the time on talking head TV.
and where is the US population on this? i’d bet my bottom dollar that majority is in support of torture. the government including the judicial branch only reflects the will of the majority of the population. a long-term education for consciousness raising, starting with the teenagers in junior high and high schools, is the only way for real change from within without another violent civil war. or, pressure for change will come from outside.
Per the Wikipedia:
Per Wikipedia’s entry on Lord of the Flies:
From the plot summary:
When George and Dick descended into barbarism, they took the entire tribe with them.
“…why is our government still hiding complicity of the torture gang?”
This is the 64 thousand dollar question.
Could it be the complicity is so great (including people who are still in power) that they’re concerned about the magnitude of repercussions and the effect this would have on future governance?
Or could it be they don’t want to punish former government officials for actions they may want to consider taking themselves?
Who knows?
Yet time is of some essence, is it not, curioussteve?
When the law embraces tyranny, in the name of the people, and then justifies this act as what the people want and desire, then, the law embraces a classic form of false argument, “Argumentum ad populum”, quite as the political establishment has adopted “Argumentum ad baculum”, which is argument backed by a stick, and its classic form is this, “You are either with us or against us.”
Which phrase some here may recall from its last, and “famous” usage.
It constitutes the essence of our “foreign policy” and has domestic application as well, no doubt.
One imagines that “Argument ad hominem” and “Argument ad ignoratiam” will soon be even more ubiquitous.
As our civility and such society as we may have are mocked and rent by these slings and arrows of “legitimate” and “legal” tyranny, we may expect to see certain other, lesser, more “esoteric” forms of false argument raised to a lofty height.
How soon, I wonder, will opposition to the direction the powerful and very wealthy have chosen to take us all, be seen and understood as far more than intellectual exercise?
It may (and must) be well understood that those in power, from both political parties, who support and champion this new “direction” have thought about that question.
Who are they who support (or dare not challenge) this “change”? They may be known, those who are duty-bound to respond to the attack on the principles of this nation, by their roaring silence. And … the deepest complicity which that silence cannot help but most-eloquently express.
DW
Since most of the US population seems to be getting all its information on torture from Fox and CNN, both of which are quite happy to tell us that it isn’t torture and the government is getting lots of information through it, I wouldn’t want to use that as my standard. Especially since there’s been a lot of lying going on about what, who, how much, and what was gotten out of it.
I think the lawyers who said torture was okay, and those who helped them do so, and those who made it very clear that that was the answer they wanted, should be held liable in a court.
I’m not sure exactly where he was going with his graphic, bc it seems the list you reproduce is both overly complete and incomplete for an OPR investigation response. OPR didn’t have the ability to look into Bellinger, Addington, Muller, Rizzo(basically any non-DOJ lawyers or when they were acting in a non-DOJ capacity – I’m not sure where-where-how Flanigan was acting at the various operative times) If he was just listing everyone, it seems that Haynes (as is already observed above) would have been included and Goldsmith for the things he was willing to sign off on, and the other CTC lawyers, and Goznales once he had become AG, etc.
So is Bybee’s list meant to be a list of those who he has personal knowledge were involved in the torture approvals, or did his just pull together a list from his review of the OPR report and docs and it just happens to be a kind of shoddy list?
This is my takeaway. This is Bybee’s list; not Yoo’s list. If Yoo was constructing this list, I would expect it to have included the real hands on folks like Haynes and Fredman.
Based on all that we’ve seen and discussed, I’ve come away with the impression that Bybee was mostly “out to lunch” when it came down to some of the weedier details and weedier going-ons in regard to Torture policy and practice.
In a sense, Bybee was being used by Yoo as a figurehead who would blindly signoff on the Yoo/Addington/Flanigan/Rizzo/Fredman constructions.
I’m not suggesting that Bybee was totally ignorant or unwitting; just that he seems to have mostly left the gory details to Yoo & Co.
And make no mistake, Bybee was a plenty willing signatory to “anything goes” torture policies.
No, the U.S. population is not in favor of this. They mostly live lives (to quote old Thoreau) of “quiet desperation”. They are fearful, do not trust their government, understand on some level that the government is very, very powerful, whether through the military, the IRS, or whatever. The conspiracy theories that are popular, the sense of impotency and nothing that can be done, is pervasive. Some of the population has been driven into mystical reveries on the end of days, some into a frenzy by racist demagogues, while others divert themselves by constant distraction with alcohol/drugs, overwork, addiction to sports or exercise, or are themselves broken down — millions of them — by depression and anxiety disorders.
It is both psychologically naive and historically inaccurate to draw the mood of national populations in such a way. This is not to say that there is some proportion of the population that favors torture, in so far as they understand it. But the ups and downs of the polls on this demonstrate that the underlying hard-core support is definitely in the minority.
+++++++ This is a great job, EW, and I, too, was struck by Yoo and Bybee’s defense of drawing in the rest of the torture crowd, and in this, they are quite right (though it is not really a defense of themselves and their own actions). It is more appropriately a message to those who run the government.
Yoo and Bybee to Congress, to Holder, to Obama and those big-money men who have influence in the corridors of power: Do you really want to see us on the stand in a big, Watergate style investigation or prosecution testifying to how basically the entire executive branch signed off on torture? And maybe we can drag down some big members from Congress, too, while we’re at it? Do we want to see the government take the kind of hit in credibility that it did after Vietnam and Watergate? This will all pass. We’ve got big fish to fry, in South Asia, in the Persian Gulf, in the restive southern tier of European states, who are suffering terribly economically, and only a generation or so had millions of people who truly believed that the rich capitalist class, who’d supported the fascists, were the real problem. Some of these people can’t get over the revelations from 1990, when Italy (and by extension Europe) discovered that the CIA had been running secret military squads, even armies, in Europe since the end of World War II, including major support of right-wing bombings, and infiltration of left-wing groups with provocateurs to push terrorism. (Of course, this was barely reported in the U.S.)
The latter refers to Operation Gladio, which caused Italy’s biggest governmental crisis in the early 1990s, and still is simmering with revelations yet to explode, as the archives are being released. Gladio may yet be ready to try another coup in Turkey, perhaps even Greece.
[I've been researching this and will write up soon. But as a preview, see this CBC story, CIA knew, but didn't stop bombings in Italy - report; this Time magazine article, Europe NATO's Secret Army; this UK Guardian article, Terrorists 'helped by CIA' to stop rise of left in Italy; or read online (via Google books) part of the well-documented book, Puppetmasters: the Political Use of Terrorism in Italy. Or consider this story, from just 2008, in the UK Telegraph, US envoy admits role in Aldo Moro killing]
What revelations are yet to be revealed? We can’t let this torture business get away from us. Marginalize it. Don’t let it be reported much in the major press. The population is worried about health care and their next paycheck, whether their life-savings have gone down the tube, or are in danger of that.
We’re sitting in the catbird seat (implicitly say Yoo and Bybee): hang us out to dry and we’ll bring down the temple.
Now, why, really why would the U.S. government do that? Answer: They won’t unless public pressure pushes them farther and farther, and some political boulders start to shake loose, and fall our way.
In the meantime, we need the work of the Marcy Wheelers, the Scott Hortons, the Andy Worthingtons, the Jason Leopolds and Naomi Wolfs, and numerous others, to build that bonfire high and wild, until the people see it, and feel ready to do something about it.
Well and truly said.
I add the name, Jeff Kaye, to the last paragraph.
DW
“Since most of the US population seems to be getting all its information on torture from Fox and CNN, both of which are quite happy to tell us that it isn’t torture and the government is getting lots of information through it, I wouldn’t want to use that as my standard. Especially since there’s been a lot of lying going on about what, who, how much, and what was gotten out of it.”
Torture and the use of violence — both physical and psychological — are so deeply imbedded in American Culture, I can more or less excuse due to unthinking repetition, the likes of Fox or CNN.
The examples of what you are up against are probably best understood in the context of realistic fiction, or narrative history — some of the earliest ‘stories’ of either type would be the torture tales associated with Indian Captivity Legends (Mass. Bay Colony was essentially unified around these during King Phillip’s War), and in more modern times we have the Godfather Literature, both film and novels, where riches and power are derived from loyality to blood oaths, but provide Terroristic Consequences for disrespecting or violating such oaths, and those who take them and are are deeply respected “made men.”
The result is an American Culture simply saturated with beliefs, sophisticated and less critically considered as basic assumptions, that striking terror into the heart of an opponent just simply works at all levels.
There has been a lot of polling in recent years on torture — and while the results probably depend on how the question is asked, at least half of the population registers a belief in it. There are essentially two polling questions reflecting depth of belief in torture — do you believe it works? and do you, in terms of your values, believe in it? Belief always is a little lower than certainity that it works, probably reflecting some degree of moral education, but both responses are between 50 and 60%.
I would add another genre of literature to this — cop stories, whether true crime or those that turn on the buddy principle of the cop fraternity, but virtually all of them reference the so called “third degree” plot elements, both physical and psychological, that operate to validate cop authority.
So if you just enumerate enough different classes of this, Our American Cultural Narrative, you can see how far reaching it is — and how darn hard it would be to change it.
Please don’t omit the institution of slavery, a deeply embedded part of the culture of violence and degradation.
One could take the American “narrative” back to The Doctrine of Discovery.
And we must not forget the ties all of these “justifications” have to the “revealed truth” of a particular religious “tradition”.
The divine “inspiration”.
DW
The population is worried about health care and their next paycheck, whether their life-savings have gone down the tube, or are in danger of that.
Would it be too paranoid to think that both the healthcare mess and the financial fiasco are actually part of the Oligarchy’s plan to subjugate the masses?
Probably, but I can’t help thinking it sometimes anyway…
Just deny that what you did is what they call it and, instead, use the euphemism of your choice. E.g., not “torture” but “enhanced interrogation.”
Though we may be paranoid, harpie, does not mean that “they” are not busily working at creating confusions and even calamity, for to those whose patholgy is bereft of human empathy, such catastrophe, as we all face, povides most useful and profitable opportunity …
DW
Flagitious patriotism is about to flourish.
And … Yoo and Bybee must be held to be honorable and courage men, who loved their country above all else … especially by the Democrats.
(They did seek, from the outset, to ensure that they would not be brought to account for their noble deed, but that is what a competently clever practitioner of the law is all about these days, that and due deference.)
Your flying pig comment was a thing of sublime beauty, BTW, fatster.
DW
Well, do enjoy. Nowadays I’m good for an interesting comment only about once a fortnight. I do try to be aware of the tender sensitivities of others, however, so only a few appear in the public domain.
Nice to know I’m not alone. ;-)
only reflects the will of the majority of the population
I don’t agree on that – I think the great institutions (courts, DOJ, WH, Churches, media) and individuals in some of those institutions more often create the will of the majority.
The majority has been told over and over, by all of those institutions that provide a more compass and base of public knowledge and by all the leaders in those institutions, that this is only about splashing water in the face of terrorists who planned and helped execute 9-11. The fact that none of what gets floated stands up to any kind of scrutiny doesn’t meant that it hasn’t been drilled, like multiplication tables, into the minds of the majority until it has become an accepted norm.
Once that is accomplished, the incremtals (and confusion) that comes from rolling disclosure and gaps and confusing disclosures and factual disclosures accompanied by competing propagandized releases of dis and misinformation, all become set. Not because the majority of Americans were or are truly in favor of torture, but because they have been told that the “liberals” call splashing a terrorist with water “torture” and that “torture” saved the nation
No one in the MSM or Congress ever talks about the things like the al-Libi torture that would end up being the equivalent of hitting a reset for most Americans. So with the only leadership being institutions like the courts saying that US gov torture cases like Arar and el-Masri can’t be heard and with MSM and Congress never focusing on them and with DOJ not only not doing anything about the torture, but instead affirmatively showing up and suppressing judicial review – well, most people just process “case dismissed” and “Government wins” and never really process what the case was about or what it was Government won. They assume some credibility in the institutions – they believe that any one of them might misdirect, but the interwoven and collusive behavior of all the men and all the money and all the institutions is something that isn’t going to be easily processed, especially when one of the major failed institutions is the media and when the second failed institution is the courts. To add in the collapse of the “Saturday Night Massacre” mythology of decent men as the top prosecutors in the nation really means that the majority would have to accept that America rotted over the last 8 years and they won’t do that unless and until a) they have leadership that is truthful or b) they have to personally experience the rot.
And even when it is b – they will most often merely resort to the learned behavior and learned responses from the last decade.
When the control of information and messaging is vested in institutions riddled with men who, instead of leading and sharing facts instead choose to become criminals who can cloak themselves with the power of their office and, over time, use that power to even bring the nation to its knees in grateful praise of abominations, the consequences are huge – but they weren’t the inevitable consequences driven by the will of the majority.
And side-trips into things like witch trials and trial-by-ordeal.
Hold them all accountable. What a concept.
“And side-trips into things like witch trials and trial-by-ordeal.”
Yes, I am quite aware of how the Legends of King Phillips War stimulated the Salem Witch Trials.
I am a 13th generation descendent of the last woman to be arrested in the event…one Dutch Elwell. She managed to excape the trials because the Governor of Mass. had issued orders to cease using spectral evidence (i.e., “I saw so and so’s shape hovering over Goodie Smith’s fevered child” etc.) While she was let out of the Gloucester Jail, she and her husband had to sell everything and leave Mass, and eventually they settled in New Jersey in a newly developed Quaker settlement.
No — I didn’t mean to skip over slavery, it is just there are too many examples in Narrative History and in realistic fiction to cover them all. Just last month, for instance, we saw Pat Robertson’s interpretation of the Haitian Earthquake (deals with the devil). That narrative belongs with the whole class of slave revolt legends that track back to the French Refugees from Haiti’s arrival and settlement around Charleston SC in the late 1700′s.
“And we must not forget the ties all of these “justifications” have to the “revealed truth” of a particular religious “tradition”.
The divine “inspiration”.”
Yes, one does have to ask about the prominence given to representations of an act of extreme torture in religious art, and in the central furnishings of worship settings. Even more problematic, the doctorinal emphasis placed on sharing in the pain of such torture, and comprehending it as redemptive. Is it any wonder similar themes have been woven into common beliefs about torture? Why should we be all that surprised that a film about that Torture Narrative was “hot stuff” from Hollywood, at about the same time the Bushie Clan was drafting up their torture memos?
sara @35
“torture..so deeply embeded in american culture.”
and in the cultures from whence american culture arose.
state (not to mention religious institutions’) use of torture and of arbitrary deprivation of property and liberty was part of the historical knowledge of those who devised our constitution.
i’ve always assumed that it was because they knew their english and french political history, and had had personal experience with the crown’s arbitrariness in the conies, that we ended up with several of the amendments in the bill of rights.
That’s certainly Naomi Klein’s view, a la “The Shock Doctrine.”
continuing
just so the connection of my comment to torture is clear
the fifth of the ten amendments, collectively known as the Bill
of Rights, provides among other rights, that a person cannot be forced to testify against himself.
i read that to mean a person cannot be tortured to confess his putative illegal activity.
i suppose america’s torture lawyers would get around this by saying “we didn’t ask x if he was guilty; we asked him who worked with him, or who planned the activity.”
the lawyers here can weigh in, but i believe it’s the case that the constitution applies to non-americans as well.
in any event, there are american and international laws making torturing a crimimal offense.
The Bush administration used that technique throughout and we’ve seen the financial industry do the same with not-really-insurance Credit Default Swaps, so I think they’re very likely tied at the waist and essentially the same people.
They’re all guilty of trying to destroy America for their own aggrandizement and profit. Proving it in a court is harder, but it’s awfully nice of Yoo & Bybee to provide some useful information.
Glenn Greenwald had a post on this issue. Statistics prior to the Obama administration showed a small majority against torture. But nearly a year into the Obama administration the same question showed a small majority supporting torture.
Bipartisanship works!
(Sorry I don’t have the link.)
My sis-in-law has Susanna North Martin, who was considerably less fortunate. (From what I’ve read, she seems to have been pretty good with the backtalk, and not so good at figuring what her more conventional neighbors thought of her.)
Time to peaceably emigrate to a more peaceable country.
Mary @ 44 wrote,
“I think the great institutions (courts, DOJ, WH, Churches, media) and individuals in some of those institutions more often create the will of the majority. ”
Well, there’s obviously a feedback loop or two involved, but you can see your point in Republicans all the time, especially McConnell (Senate Minority Leader), Eric Cantor et al., who are always saying “The American people think…” and then spout some Republican talking points that may or may not be loosely based on some actual poll results. Their tactic is that if you repeat a lie or half-truth often enough, people start to believe it. And then people who really weren’t terribly sure about the point start to align themselves with what they’re told the “American people” think.
Bob in AZ
“And side-trips into things like witch trials and trial-by-ordeal.”
I’m a descendant of Rebecca Nurse (1621-1692), who did not escape the trials. Heh, I wonder if there’s an organization for descendants of the Salem “witches.”
Interesting that we should be interested in wrongful trials on a website often concerned with wrongful lack of trials.
Bob in AZ
Amen!
And what does one call that formation, anyway, without assuming facts not in evidence on the illustration? I guess, a fine example of pretending to inform.
[This article links a review of books by Edward Tufte, a leading expositor (ok, the leading expositor) of quality in informational graphics. The reviewer summarizes Tufte's principles, beginning with "Tell the truth" [my emph]. Key example: the burial of vital information in lousy charts meant to describe functional aspects of the space shuttle Challenger.]
“I’m a descendant of Rebecca Nurse (1621-1692), who did not escape the trials. Heh, I wonder if there’s an organization for descendants of the Salem “witches.”
Interesting that we should be interested in wrongful trials on a website often concerned with wrongful lack of trials.
Bob in AZ”
I visited Salem and Gloucester back in 1974 — the summer of Richard Nixon’s final hours — and signed the book for descendents at the museum, but have heard nothing as a result. But that was pre-internet, so someone would have had to budget for postage, or collect dues or what not, so what would you expect?
Have you read Mary Beth Norton’s book, “In the Devil’s Snare: The Salem Witchcraft Crisis of 1692.” (Knopf, 2002)? She cites a number of persons in a descendents group who assisted her with research over the years, and is herself a descendent of Susanna North Martin, mentioned above (54) by PJ Evans as his ancestor. Norton is something of a Women’s History pioneer, first tenured female historian at Cornell.
And no, I don’t find it particularly strange that those of us brought up with knowledge that at least some of our roots trace back to those times and events would not haul such consciousness into our view of events of our day.
As you say, Sara, those of us whose roots go back far enough in our nation’s history, are related to all kinds of goings on, and such connected-consciousness cannot help but have its impact on what we see and consider in our time, today.
Perspective is a marvelous thing and does wonders for notions of exceptional-ism and myths of superiority.
And, the most amazing thing is that we ALL have ancestors, going back, to the very beginning of the human “adventure”.
And, all of us have familial lessons … learned or not.
DW
None of my New Englanders were in Salem, but a few were fairly close. One of my very favorite female relatives, a first cousin almost a dozen times removed now, was Anne Marbury Hutchinson. I descend from other females whose lives were equally as inspiring, though they were not famous as was Anne. It is humbling and challenging and actually fills one with courage to know what these women did–particularly when so much was stacked up against them. And you learn ever so much history as you explore the times in which they lived and struggled.
(I think this is the most O/T of O/Ts I’ve ever posted here. Hope I’ll be forgiven.)
The “laws” of consanguinity suggest that you, fatster, speak for all of us.
Such “excursions” are much appreciated.
;~DW
*blush*
Thnx.
Torture is hardly ‘embedded’ in our society. Until Cheney decided he needed to torture the ‘truth of WMD’s in Iraq’ out of a bunch of unlucky Iraqi detainees, it was considered a war crime. Still is to most of us.
Enjoy
I’ll chip in to charter planes to send the whole lot of them to the Hague so that they can sort it out. One way trips for the lot of the torturing monsters.
“Have you read Mary Beth Norton’s book, “In the Devil’s Snare: The Salem Witchcraft Crisis of 1692.” (Knopf, 2002)?”
No, I haven’t. Thanks for the recommendation.
Bob in AZ
I haven’t spent much time on EW since elections, rather have spent considerable time plumbing depths of the “financial crisis” for both personal and moral reasons.
I think I’ve got a good handle on it.
I don’t know about a “plan to subjugate the masses”, but I can tell you that structurally, much is the same in various Fed agency’s treatment of the many tentacles of massive financial crimes… that result being: nothing. That Geithner/BO chose to recapitalize the crooks who pulled that off, all the worse.
The various players, not on front pages. The guys who WS spread around the country to bribe state investment managers to “invest” in their various flavours of mortgage bond derivatives… MSM hasn’t scraped the surface yet. And all of this, literally… not only no action from DOJ, nor meaningful correction by congress, instead most of the worst offenders have spread out & reconstituted in various groups mostly doing the same shit they did last time. A number of ‘em got contracts w/Treasury & Fed to “manage” the taxpayer acquired toxic assets.
Summary of similarities:
* many, many crimes of near unimaginable scope… near 1 yrs US GDP ripped off.
* no prosectutions of worst offenders, much less identifying them and their actions. The
conservative media defends them as heros.
* All their doings happen(ed) out of sight, in incestuous communities of non-public like minded
groups, pulling strings and resources of government in detriment to the well being of public &
society as a whole.
* They have eroded the functioning of institutions intended to oversee and prevent just the
abuses we’ve experienced. In many cases, their various minions have been placed as heads
in respective agencies.
It is, IMO, larger residue of Bush years: destruction of US character and moral core. And I don’t use term “destruction” lightly.
Yeah, I don’t know if the plan is to subjugate the masses so much as just bleed them dry like leeches. On the other hand, there may not be much difference.
Welcome home, we have missed you.
thanks for the kind words, bmaz.