Obama releasing torture memos. Change we can believe in.

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes...-memos-to-be-released/

April 16, 2009, 11:30 am
Secret Interrogation Memos to Be Released
By Mark Mazzetti

After a tense internal debate, the Obama administration this afternoon will make public a number of detailed memos describing the harsh interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency against al Qaeda suspects in secret overseas prisons.

The interrogation methods were among the Bush administration?s most closely guarded secrets, and today?s release will be the most comprehensive public accounting to date of the interrogation program that some senior Obama administration officials have said used illegal torture.

The documents are expected to include Justice Department memos from 2002 and 2005 authorizing the C.I.A. to employ a number of aggressive techniques- including sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme temperatures and ?waterboarding,? the near-drowning technique.

Among the anticipated documents are detailed 2005 memos by Stephen G. Bradbury, who as acting head of the Justice Department?s Office of Legal Counsel authorized the C.I.A. techniques. The documents have never before been made public, but an article in The New York Times in October 2007 said that the memos gave legal support for using a combination of coercive techniques at the same time and concluded that the C.I.A.?s methods were not ?cruel, inhuman or degrading? under international law.

Another document expected to be released this afternoon is a Justice Department memo written August 1, 2002. The memo, written by John C. Yoo and signed by Jay S. Bybee, two Justice Department officials at the time, is a legal authorization for a laundry list of proposed C.I.A. interrogation techniques.


The debate about just how much detail to include in the public release bitterly divided an Obama administration still in early months. Fueling the urgency of the discussion was today?s court deadline in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which had sued the government for the release of the Justice Department memos.

Leon E. Panetta, the C.I.A. director, has pressed the White House for weeks to redact sensitive details about specific interrogation techniques. He argued that revealing such information would pave the way for future disclosures of intelligence sources and methods, and would jeopardize the C.I.A.?s relationship with foreign intelligence services.

But the most immediate concern of C.I.A. officials is that the revelations could give new momentum to a full-blown congressional investigation into covert activities under the Bush Administration.

Other Obama administration officials, including Gregory B. Craig, the White House counsel, and Attorney General Eric H. Holder, argued that releasing the documents not only would satisfy the government?s obligation in the lawsuit, but would also put distance between President Obama and some of his predecessor?s most controversial policies.

On Wednesday, Mr. Obama?s top advisers met at the White House for the final round of deliberations over the interrogation documents.

Good. The irony here is, of course, the right will accuse Obama of being a pansy french inspired traitor to the country, at the same time calling him a rutheless iron fisted fascist/communist who wants to grow the scope and size of government and imprison all 'patriotic' dissenters.

I wonder how the 'tea party' idiots will respond to more government transparency.

Oh lets be honest, they'll bitch about it incessantly.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
This took a lot, he was under a lot of pressure from the intelligence community not to do this, reportedly. It's excellent news.

It's a big step in the direction of his liberal base, his promises, for moving away from these policies and increasing transparency.

While he's justifiably been under a lot of heat lately for not doing enough, an act like this shuts down the 'no better than Bush' nonsense clearly and solidy. Good for him.

Those who care about morals and the morals and image of our nation can show it by not going to the Fox 'tea party' and instead expressing support for this decision.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,878
55,114
136
Don't release the memos: LOLCHANGE
Release the memos: He's just trying to distract us! Petty politics! LOLCHANGE
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: Craig234
Those who care about morals and the morals and image of our nation can show it by not going to the Fox 'tea party' and instead expressing support for this decision.
I care about the morals and image of our nation but am struggling to see how this particular decision is related to whether or not someone supports the tea party protests. I msut be missing something here.
 

Balt

Lifer
Mar 12, 2000
12,673
482
126
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Don't release the memos: LOLCHANGE
Release the memos: He's just trying to distract us! Petty politics! LOLCHANGE

:laugh:
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

People have died under our custody due to torture
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Place this under old business - unless we get a bunch more background and info.

Once Alberto and his 'CCC' opined that it wasn't torture as long as it was ""short of the pain equivalent to organ failure and death "" I think we got the gist ...
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.
It seems that Obama really struggled with this decision and I can't help to wonder that their may be some potentially undesirable ramifications he was weighing.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

It's not even all about what is in the memos. Even if there are no "crimes" committed, the far left, which is out of fucking control as it already is, may attack those who are named in the memos, just for the sake of being named in the memos.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
ya, i am sure he will release ALL of the memos, with information that we have received... all of them, uhhuh, sure...
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
ya, i am sure he will release ALL of the memos, with information that we have received... all of them, uhhuh, sure...

Better than what the ReTHUGlicans would've done: stayed the course and maybe even added MORE torture techniques :roll:
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
ya, i am sure he will release ALL of the memos, with information that we have received... all of them, uhhuh, sure...

Well Obama has to throw these people a token bone, and of course they get all spastic about it like well trained bots. It's about 5% of what they've been clamoring for for years but I guess they have to trump up some sense of victory...

I don't have a problem with Obama doing what he did, it's just funny how manipulated some people are and watching them spin spin spin is always an amusing pastime.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Thank God. This is the right thing to do. Like a husband hiding something from his wife, if he's ashamed maybe he should stop doing what he's doing, and the US is no different. I cannot imagine these will impact anything of strategic importance and it's important that the US shed the image it has recently created as a hypocrisy. It can't claim to not torture but in fact torture because it's not telling you about it.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: Phokus
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

People have died under our custody due to torture

Proof someone died from waterboarding?

Im sure it could happen, but id like to read more on this incident you are referring to.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: Phokus
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

People have died under our custody due to torture

Proof someone died from waterboarding?

Im sure it could happen, but id like to read more on this incident you are referring to.

I didn't say by waterboarding

From a quick search:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/g...d/2008/12/15/rumsfeld/

I'll google tonight after work to see if anyone has died from waterboarding
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Craig234
Those who care about morals and the morals and image of our nation can show it by not going to the Fox 'tea party' and instead expressing support for this decision.
I care about the morals and image of our nation but am struggling to see how this particular decision is related to whether or not someone supports the tea party protests. I msut be missing something here.

Sorry for not being clearer - I was referring to the tea party goers as largely right-wing people who didn't show much concern about the torture policies under Bush, but who are willing to get in an uproar for the faux-cause of the 'tea parties'. It wasn't saying the tea parties are directly related, but rather mentioning them to say how the activism these people are showing for the tea parties is pretty misplaced - the tea parties show they can get politically active, so I'm encouraging them to pick a better cause.

Note - I'd also like to clarify that I'm referring to the worse part of the tea parties. If they were an actual sensible protest against the policies of the bailout, I'd say more power to them - it's the 'Sean Hannity said to go so I'm going to wave a flag and rant against all taxes' types I'm criticizing. There actually were a decent number of better protestors at the parties too, and they deserve some credit for that.

Consider a woman the editor of salon.com met at the San Francisco tea bag party:

[qI watched [former banker Christina Plutarkos] confess to a small crowd that "I don't oppose Obama," while she tried to convince them the real economic scandal is the bipartisan bank bailout. Plutarkos carried a big yellow sign that on one side read, "The stimulus is already working saving essential jobs ... it's the bailout that's the problem," and on the other asked: "Why did Treasury let AIG close out credit default swaps for 100 cents on the dollar?" I'm not kidding. She was trying to get the tea partiers to turn their anger toward the bailout, and she was getting a fairly respectful hearing.

"Liberals are idiots, they don't try to engage these people, they're too ideological," Plutarkos told me. How was engagement going? "It's been very interesting. People are nice to me. A burly 60-year-old man gave me a hug. 'I'm with you, honey.'" She made friends with a group of young libertarian guys, and walked with them over to the rump rally that wound up at City Hall. It was kind of a nice end to the day.[/quote]

All in all it was a small point to reinforce that thse people can get politically active if they want, and not too much should be read into it about the tea bag protests.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: Phokus



I didn't say by waterboarding

From a quick search:

*snip*


It looks like a bunch of conclusions being drawn without real proof.

Got a hard-news story?


People die in prisons/jails in the US all the time.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,878
55,114
136
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.
It seems that Obama really struggled with this decision and I can't help to wonder that their may be some potentially undesirable ramifications he was weighing.

Republicans threatening to attack his nominees could be one.

I would take anything in that article with a large grain of salt, but it's a possibility.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.
It seems that Obama really struggled with this decision and I can't help to wonder that their may be some potentially undesirable ramifications he was weighing.

Republicans threatening to attack his nominees could be one.

I would take anything in that article with a large grain of salt, but it's a possibility.

Is that before or after we attack Iran and cancel the 2008 election?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Phokus
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

People have died under our custody due to torture

Well if "killed by torture" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how?

If something worse than "killed by torture" came up, then I can see this being an issue.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: Phokus
Originally posted by: OCguy
Well if "waterboarding" is as bad as it got, this is going to be a big deal how? The public already knows that we waterboarded.

If something worse came up, then I can see this being an issue.

People have died under our custody due to torture

Proof someone died from waterboarding?

Im sure it could happen, but id like to read more on this incident you are referring to.

He didn't say waterboarding, he said torture (I'd include 'physical abuse', this hair-splitting is offensive to me though) - and it wasn't a singular incident.