by emptywheel
On June 29, SCOTUS ruled that even enemy combatants must be treated according to the Geneva Convention.
On July 13, Christine Axsmith posted this on her blog on the CIA's confidential intranet, Intelink.
Waterboarding is torture, and torture is wrong.
Not to mention ineffective. Econo-Girl has serious doubts as to whether European lives were saved.
Econo-Girl's purpose in writing this blog is to start a dialog on the Geneva Convention, since it now applies to the Department of Defense again. Guess it's not quaint anymore, eh?
Over the next few weeks, Econo-Girl would like to post articles about the Geneva Convention, like its origin and major provisions. Legal analysis is not the magic some would have you believe.
If the grunts and paper pushers are knowledgeable, the anti-torture infrastructure will be strengthened.
On July 13, her blog was taken down and her security badge taken away. Fewer than 890 people read the post.
On July 17, she was fired from her job with CIA contractor BAE Systems and she lost her Top Secret security clearance (hat tip to Laura Rozen for the links).
As I said just after the Hamdan ruling, the ruling won't so much change the Administration's behavior (as my blogmate Kagro X has shown repeatedly). But it may convince the individuals who carry out the Administration's atrocities to stop cooperating.
But when Bush and Rummy endorse torture, the application of torture is not a question of whether or not someone can prevent Bush and Rummy from torturing. It's a question of whether those asked to carry out the torture will do it. Already, the multiple reviews of our torture policy have come as one after another agency have expressed concern based on legal guidelines. The CIA and parts of the Army have refused to continue using these methods unless they get clearer guidelines justifying its legality.
Well, now SCOTUS has pretty clearly said, given the clear direction from Congress, torture is not legal, no matter what Rummy has inserted into the Army's manual on interrogation, no matter what Bush said in his signing statement. And I don't think it will even take a very noble person to refuse to carry out these practices. It will just take an awareness of this ruling, which says law trumps executive overstep. As one and another person simply attempts to CYA, to avoid violating McCain's law and the Geneva Convention, it will get harder and harder for BushCo to find people willing to waterboard and humiliate.
And, I suppose, that was the danger of Axsmith's post. While on an earlier assignment, Axsmith read interrogation reports that--presumably--relied on waterboarding. She knew from classified documents what we all know from press reports and books, that the CIA has tortured detainees. And she simply pointed out that waterboarding had not achieved what Condi had claimed, saving lives. Waterboarding is ineffective. Perhaps just as dangerous, she threated to make the "grunts and paper pushers ... knowledgeable," strengthening "the anti-torture infrastructure."
The whole incident reminds me of the framework Vaclav Havel used in his essay "Power of the Powerless." Havel described how the entire framework of post-totalitarian society depends on habitual behaviors that contribute to the system's ideology. When a greengrocer places the sign, "Workers of the World, Unite!" in his window each morning, he signifies his willingness to accept the false reality of the system's ideology.
...the greengrocer declares his loyalty (and he can do no other if his declaration is to be accepted) in the only way the regime is capable of hearing; that is, by accepting the prescribed ritual, by accepting appearances as reality, by accepting the given rules of the game. In doing so, however, he has himself become a player in the game, thus making it possible for the game to go on, for it to exist in the first place.
Havel implies that if the greengrocers stopped placing their sign in their window each day, the system would collapse. And collapse it did.
In our case, of course, the lies have to do with our claim to be a nation of laws, the beacon of liberty around the world. Those lies depend as much on our silence as they do on any signs we place in our windows--our silence, among other things, about our embrace of torture.
Waterboarding is torture. A nation of laws does not torture. We are not a nation of laws.
I was not surprised when I read about this. We "claim" to be a nation of laws but it seems that it is more in past tense.
What is evident is that we are living Orwellian times. Fiction has become fact! We have become a society where American Idol is more important than warantless spying on Americans. Yes, the greengrocer that puts up the sign!
Posted by: ab initio | July 22, 2006 at 13:26
Christy Hardin Smith just commented this over at FDL.
"July 22nd, 2006 at 10:27 am
lotus at 66 and everyone else — don’t you dare define this nation as a whole based on the policies of the neocons. Their view of the world and this nation is not mine, nor is it the perspective that most Americans take. Do not allow yourself to define this country by their actions — they bear responsibility for what they do, but they are not the whole of America. Words have strong meaning, and we need to be very careful what words we use in this — the neocons, the Bush Administration and their failed policies are not the best of America. Don’t define the whole by the parts that are failing the rest of us."
Thanks for an as per usual great post emptywheel.
OT, your 3G 4G analysis is so on target for what is going on in Lebanon, once someone understands your "One Week" post, it put the unfolding tragedy in perspective.
Posted by: John Casper | July 22, 2006 at 13:52
waterboarding is torture ???
didn't I say that in a comment here about two weeks back ???
I was way ahead of the curve on Rove's SF-312 too
Looks like I'm two weeks ahead of the "smart" media (which is equivilent to 7 years in the MSM)
so I'm dog years ahead of the NY Times, and light years ahead of the repuglicans
what else is new ???
Posted by: freepatriot | July 22, 2006 at 14:21
I was thnking today of the former Bush Treasury Secretary in Pittsburgh, Paul O'Neil, who went underground after the WH threatened to prosecute him for releasing "classified information" in his tell-all book. It all seems such a shameless abuse of the legal system, I don't know how legal professionals can bear it and remain silent.
Posted by: kim | July 22, 2006 at 15:30
Perhaps we could call the White House (switchboard 202-456-1414; opinion line 202-456-1111) EVERYDAY, keeping the phones ringing off the hook with demands that Bush resign or face impeachment. That’s what happened a few weeks before Nixon resigned. People all across America were bombarding the phone lines with calls to the White House, demanding Nixon’s impeachment. I always thought that our telephone calls had hastened Nixon’s resignation --- more than any other contributing factor… But then again, I could be wrong. Maybe lawmakers had more integrity back then and actually cared about democratic principals.
Posted by: lespool | July 22, 2006 at 18:47
Perhaps we could call the White House (switchboard 202-456-1414; opinion line 202-456-1111) EVERYDAY, keeping the phones ringing off the hook with demands that Bush resign or face impeachment. That’s what happened a few weeks before Nixon resigned. People all across America were bombarding the phone lines with calls to the White House, demanding Nixon’s impeachment. I always thought that our telephone calls had hastened Nixon’s resignation --- more than any other contributing factor… But then again, I could be wrong. Maybe lawmakers had more integrity back then and actually cared about democratic principals.
Posted by: lespool | July 22, 2006 at 18:49
My monthly Blog Brief column for the Legal Intelligencer discusses this post. Link here: http://blogbrief.blogspot.com/2006/07/ignoring-hamdan-with-justifications.html
I tried email to thenexthurrah@yahoo.com prior to publication, but emails all bounced back.
Posted by: Luke | July 27, 2006 at 16:29
To do cheap shopping isn´t that easy. To know all the tricks to a good deal is difficult. Not so many years ago, desiring a certain expensive piece could lead to the acquisition of generic knock offs. But time has changed. Trips to Bostonfound lots of street vendors selling lots of knock offs including purses, sneakers, CD ROM,hats and many more. It always seemed innocent and like a way to get what you wanted for a much better price. So you need to know the trick to make a good shopping deal. But it is not that easy. No one at that time suspected anything about where the pieces originated. The fact is that
plenty of those bargains are actually considered counterfeit. Some, or most of them, of the profits are aiding some major criminal activities. Some of those criminal activities are dangerous. Many counterfeit products have been seized by security. Some of those items areDVD, things that people simply assumes are in good condition.
Especially videos and DVD are often forged. So if you want to buy a good item (eg for Playstation Ratchet & Clank, you need to be careful to find the possible video. Former famous video shopping are not obsolete, as this bargaining did destroy them. So be careful in the Playstation and Disney section! Fromtodays point of view there are other things toconsider
With the increase in spreading in the online gaming society, it is understandable users are trying to empower their playstation to meet the high demands of gaming. With the ever-increasing need to give the gamers the latest products available, it has become such a huge community.
Posted by: scalaRicnoigo | May 14, 2008 at 11:43