Assuming that 9/11 is the one intelligence related thing that the Bush administration has been honest about and that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed really was the mastermind behind the attacks, it’s a shame that the CIA decided to torture him because we might actually be forced to set him free.
By mid-2002, several former agents and senior bureau officials said, they had begun complaining that the CIA-run interrogation program amounted to torture and was going to create significant problems down the road — particularly if the Bush administration was ever forced to allow the Al Qaeda suspects to face their accusers in court.
….”Those guys were using techniques that we didn’t even want to be in the room for,” one senior federal law enforcement official said. “The CIA determined they were going to torture people, and we made the decision not to be involved.”
A senior FBI official who since has retired said he also complained about the lack of usable evidence and admissible statements being gathered. “We knew there were going to be problems back then. But nobody was listening,” he said. “Now they have to live with the policy that they have adopted. I don’t know if anyone thought of the consequences.”
David Addington and Dick Cheney determined that suspects would never face a judge and so admissibility wasn’t ever going to be an issue. Unfortunately, they were wrong. Their mistakes were so bad that Congress has been struggling to come up with some legal framework that can simultaneously salvage some semblance of the Constitution without setting really bad guys free.
The Military Commission Act of 2006 is one such attempt.
Congress was forced to toss aside habeas corpus, create ex post facto laws, and become complicit in what are ordinarily understood to be war crimes. It was either that, or we set some really bad guys free.
All of this is thanks to David Addington and Dick Cheney. They are two people that richly deserve to go on trial.
“Assuming that 9/11 is the one intelligence related thing that the Bush administration has been honest about…”
that depends entirely on how far you want to stretch the bounds of credibility and odds-making… one out of 1000…? one out of 10,000…?
“All of this is thanks to David Addington and Dick Cheney. They are two people that richly deserve to go on trial.”
yeah, no question about it… if you want to gather up the whole criminal gang, it’ll be take-a-number time at the drivers’ license bureau, altho’ i’m with you, i’d still give #’s 1 and 2 to dick and his evil sidekick…
“Congress was forced to toss aside habeas corpus, create ex post facto laws, and become complicit in what are ordinarily understood to be war crimes. It was either that, or we set some really bad guys free.”
No. President Bush jeopordized the prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 9/11, by refusing to listen to the FBI. The FBI warned Bush that he could not torture suspects and then use any information gleaned from that torture in a court of law. Instead, President Bush coerced a pliant Congress and the American press into going along with a reckless plan to torture suspects. Because President Bush chose to torture suspects, and Congress went along with this decision, America cannot convict terrorist suspects of crimes under internationally recognized rules of law and war. Bush, the Congress, and all of America chose to torture. We, as a country, are all responsible.
er…that’s what I said. But I’m not responsible.
You’re right. I’m agreeing with you. I only quibble with the characterization that Congress was “coerced”. Congress didn’t need to do anything. The bind it was in wasn’t a legal bind, i.e. we already had a system to prosecute terrorists/criminals. In fact, as your post points out, torture simply made it HARDER to bring the wrongdoers to justice.
The bind Congress was in was a political bind. Right-wing thugs called them pussies for not torturing terror suspects. So they didn’t want to look like pussies and agreed to torture even if that had the exact opposite effect of being tough on terror (i.e. bringing terrorists to justice). Caving to crass political charges (from idiotic thugs, no less) is hardly coercion. Calling this political ploy “coercion” cheapens the real victims of coercion. And it cheapens the culpability of those that went along with it (Congress).
I disagree. Congress didn’t sign off on torture, they were presented with a fait accompli. Bush tortured them, then the courts said we have to try them or let them go. At that point Congress had to make a decision on whether to free a bunch of potential terrorists just because Bush is a vindictive man-child sociopath.
with all due respect, there was another choice, albeit, one that would have had serious political consequences; they could have stood up for the rule of law, and demanded accountability from the administration. they chose the politically expedient route, and as such, are complicit in the crime…it’s called abetting. ergo, coercion is not a defense, imo.
SFHawk is a lot closer to the truth than the argument that they were put in the position of letting potential terrorists go. in the mind of the administration, and congress, by all outward appearance, you’re a potential terrorist.
vindictive man-child sociopath or not, that dog won’t hunt.
lTMF’sA
well, we can’t convict most of the detainees, and we can’t keep them forever without any day in court.
What do you call it?
One fucked up situation.
and who is responsible and what should be done to them?
l call it treason, high crimes and misdemeanors, and war crimes.
bush and Cheyenne should have been, and still should be, impeached. then they, addington, gonzales, rummy, rice, woo, wolfowitz, perle, et al, should be turned over to the ICC for war crimes prosecution.
as for the rest of the bastards, they ought to be voted out…but we know that’s not going to happen, any of it.
history will be the judge of these people, and it will be harsh…but like chimpy said:…”we’ll all be dead“, although, l would like to live long enough to see it happen. karma will have to be left for a time of it’s choosing, it may grind slowly, but it is relentless.
lTMF’sA
Is unintentional treason really treason? Does it matter?
lTMF’sA
…and my question is why you all are leaving out John Yoo in this equation…what a pity.