Airing the White House Dirty Laundry
A disturbing story is stinking up the joint this week, and it centers on Barack Obama’s decision to release Bush administration memos on torture. (Or enhanced interrogation techniques, if you prefer.) I noticed that Glenn Greenwald was wrestling with the questions surrounding it today. My problem isn’t with the answers so much as the questions themselves which are being raised, and more importantly, the one which is not.
The two questions on many people’s lips seem to be:
1. Should Obama be praised for his timing in releasing the memos or did he wait too long?
2. Should he be criticized for granting immunity to government agents who followed the directives in those memos?
I find the first question a non-starter and the second one too obvious to bother with. When the memos were released doesn’t seem to matter much, and it’s insulting to suggest prosecuting the lower level grunts who followed orders and were assured / shown that they were acting in accordance with the current interpretation of the law.
No, the bigger question on my mind is, should the memos have been released at all? Yes, I know a lot of people are highly exercised over the whole thing and they want the truth brought out. Generally I default to the idea that what the government does is our business and keeping things secret from us is a sign of bad faith.
There is one area where I draw the line, though, and that comes in the form of matters of law enforcement and security. You can’t always let all of your cats out of the bag if you want to stay one step ahead of the bad guys. When a new administration comes in and finds fault with the policies of the previous, change them by all means. And if the fault is so egregious that it requires prosecution, we have military courts for such things which don’t need to have every detail hung out to dry in Newsweek.
Will this release cause future presidents to be less willing to document and retain vital documents for fear that they will be published later in the name of scoring political points? Will each administration’s tenure end with a paper shredding party in the West Wing?
What do you think? Does this set a good precedent of open government or set the stage for more secrecy and destruction of documents by those who come after?
22 Responses to “Airing the White House Dirty Laundry”
Hmm, good you weren't a judge at the Nuremberg tribunal; there you couldn't get away with “I was ordered to do it” if you committed a crime against humanity (of which torture is the second after genocide).
I said earlier that I think Obama's decision on this was the right one but I do share your concern that the exposure might drive certain things back underground.
It's a bit like renditions- if we don't find a way to handle tribunals here, then more extraordinary renditions occur, which certainly doesn't serve the purpose that we'd want. Or, we could see more airstrikes or 'battlefield' related killing of suspects instead of taking them into custody.
Fixed
As for keeping these memos secret in perpetuity, I think that's a non-starter. First off, classifying documents should be difficult. Our government should operate as transparently as possible. How else is democracy supposed to function. Secondly, classifying documents to shield criminal conduct is expressly forbidden by the laws/procedures governing classification. Thirdly, there was no longer any national security claim (one that was tenuous to begin with) once the memos had been rescinded and Obama promised we would not torture as a matter of policy.
As for future administrations shredding documents, I think you're missing the big picture. Torture is wrong, our government shouldn't do it, and people that do should be punished. The fact that the Bushies left a paper trail doesn't change any of that.
As for future administrations shredding documents, I think you're missing the big picture. Torture is wrong, our government shouldn't do it, and people that do should be punished.
Wishing won't make it so, Chris.
That's why you should support putting these people on trial. If they end up in jail, it could dissuade future leaders from breaking the law in such horrifying ways. Don't you agree?
And if you put them on trial without having the law (as written, not as we wish it had been written) behind you, then you prove to future leaders that they can similarly find ways to parse the letter of the law.
Fix the damn laws, that's the answer.
CStanley,
The laws are already there. Just because Bybee says that sleep deprivation for 11 days isn't “the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering” doesn't make it so.
If you don't think that's true, then the U.S. Government should extradite these criminals to a country with the appropriate laws. The Convention Against Torture establishes universal jurisdiction.
Everything Chris wrote, seconded thirded and quadrupled.
And to add one point: Jazz wrote:
First, we are not talking about policies here. We are talking about laws that were broken. Multiple laws, both domestic and international. And the international laws are binding on us because we signed on to them. And second, I'm certainly no expert on military law, but I don't think they are the appropriate venue for prosecuting civilian attorneys and government officials like the president and the vice-president.
I would think that any of the attorneys giving the unacceptable decisions that are still federal employees could be impeached or dismissed if Obama and the Democrats were so inclined.
Cat’s Out Of The Bag…
Did Obama blow interrogators’ cover with this release?
On the earlier thread regarding the release of the interrogation memos,
several commenters have argued that their release has made the country
less safe and interrogators less able to……
So the Bush Admin tries to create a secret torture regime, but when Obama exposes it, that will cause it to go back underground… so Obama should leave it underground? This makes not a lick of sense.
@TG- no, the concern about driving the actions underground shouldn't prohibit the decision to expose them. Maybe that's why I stated support for the decision Obama made to release the memos?
But in the real world, actions have lots of consequences and one potential consequence of internal memeorandum being revealed is that future players no longer leave a paper trail. I'm just pointing that out, which doesn't equate to “Obama should leave it underground.”
So what do you recommend then? Laws to mandate paper trails for presidential administrations? I believe those are already on the books.
These memos and the actions they publicized were no secret prior to this week. In fact, if you read the commentary prior to the release, you'll see that virtually every point in the memos was being discussed last week. Releasing them goes some distance toward demonstrating our willingness to acknowledge the wrongs we've committed.
Frankly, I'm somewhat comforted by the fact that neither the right nor the left is happy with Obama's decision. I have been shocked today to read so many opinions that this torture wasn't so bad after all. On the flip side, I am somewhat sympathetic to the argument that the US was scrambling to find ways to ensure there would never be a repeat of 9/11, and that this scrambling led to lousy decisions. Sympathetic, but not approving. Our country's intelligence service has made unlawful and inhumane mistakes over the years, but I appreciate that we live in a country which ultimately discloses and repudiates those mistakes and puts us back on the path of the rule of law.
thank you janjanjan. Jazz, I'm surprised you wrote this.
There are no surprises in these documents, only confirmation that the administration knowingly ordered these pathetic practices. With the possible exception of the insects in a coffin twist, we already knew every one of these “methods” was in use. In fact, their disclosure could just as easily convince future “bad guys” that we'll do anything. We just get a letter from our lawyer.
But that's not my point. The biggest problem with your argument is that in an international setting, there is not agreement about who are the bad guys. That's why we have international treaties. If our service personnel are taken, we want them to be treated according to global standards of decency. Even if their captors truly believe they are the bad guys, and even if they have a note from their (North Korean, Taliban) lawyers. And in case you've forgotten, many of the le
And CS
The paper trail was decreed to cover the crimes with that note from the lawyer. There's no way to get the veneer of legal cover without creating the document.
Your article is a sensible, clear-minded response to the release of the information.
Pelosi should definitely step down for condoning this program!
Let's all grow up here…..these techniques are little more than what we received in Navy SERE training or plebe year hazing. I've been “T-ed” ….wet T shirt over your nose and mouth until you pass out….try it …you won't like it but it won't kill you.
What O-b has done here is tell the bad guys what we do to “stress” people who think we will actually kill them and how we do it. They now know that they will not be hurt …just relax and learn to hold your breath for 45 seconds.
This whole “torture” story is about being anti-Bush….rather it's Obama or McCain it's poll tested to resonnat with America's sense of being the good guys. Still campaigning not governing.
Obama is clueless….McCain knows better but likes to be liked by the media…..he should know better as he has actually been tortured…and this isn't torture…it's hazing.
No redwolf. You are wrong. I don't believe this is something on which we simply disagree. Anyone who sees the Abu Ghraib pictures or the waterboarding and does not feel disgust has become, in my opinion, subhuman. But let me ask you. Do you support amending the Geneva Convention to allow all these specific procedures to be carried out on our military personnel in a time of “war” (undeclared or not)?
And let me remind you that some have died, including the innocent taxi driver who is the subject of the documentary “Taxi to the Dark Side”. But sure, people sometimes die during college hazing too. So let's just excuse the whole thing? Pathetic.
May you and your loved ones be subjected to that which you condone. No big deal, right? Faux drowning your teenage son or daughter? Naked in a dog collar. Cold and alone for weeks with blaring music, shitting themselves.
I am just disgusted. Shame on all of you torture sympathizers.
redwolf04, “these techniques are little more than what we received in Navy SERE training or plebe year hazing. I've been “T-ed” ….wet T shirt over your nose and mouth until you pass out….try it …you won't like it but it won't kill you.”
I bet you weren't subjected to these treatments (and more) for months on end with no hope in sight. After whatever you were subjected to in hazing you probably had a few beers and laughed about it with your brothers.
Also the torture in Abu Ghraib go waaaaay beyond any hazing experience…. including reports of homicide, sodomization and tying ropes to the detainees' legs or penises and dragging them across the floor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture…
GreenDreams, I agree with you response to redwolf4.
And an earlier comment from you today is also worth noting, “If our service personnel are taken, we want them to be treated according to global standards of decency. Even if their captors truly believe they are the bad guys, and even if they have a note from their (North Korean, Taliban) lawyers.
The US signed international treaties and has in the past prosecuted other leaders for war crimes, torture, etc. And the US has prosecuted its own servicemen for such actions. The US must live up to its international commitments if we are to be respected and have moral authority. There is that old saying, “A man is only worth his word, if he's not worth his word, then he is worth nothing.” And that applies to countries, too.
The point I want to make is that the US broke our own laws and international treaties. Even if torture is “little more” (to use redwolf04's characterization of it) than Navy SERE training or plebe initiation we open up the possibility that other countries will capture and torture our men and women (they could be honest to God civilians who are tourists and some group connected with some government thinks they're spies and kidnaps them). This torture perpetrated upon innocent US civilians or military personnel by other countries won't be “little more than” Navy SERE training or hazing…. This torture might include pulling out the fingernails, pulling out teeth, caning, castration, attaching electrodes to the genitals and shocking people, breaking bones, sexual assault and others.
Unfortunately the US, by torturing its enemies has made it more possible that our enemies will torture us. If we are unwilling to prosecute US individuals for their acts of torture on others, then we will be unable to prosecute those who torture us.
Besides it isn't proven that torture works. Some country (or group) holds someone they believe to have important information and because this group “knows” (rightly or wrongly) that this person has vital information they want.
If you're innocent and tell your captors that, they'll laugh in your face and torture you. They'll torture you for months until they hear what they want to hear. Their justification for doing torture is, “We know you're guilty, we just need to torture you enough so you'll break.”
And guess what…. the US made it acceptable to do so. Including to innocent people.
Always interesting to hear from two guys in the “bleacher seats”….never on the field of play…..just secure inthe bleachers ….my guess is no military service of any kind….am I right? Thought so.
Let me help you out here……
To be covered by the G Convention you must be: fighting for a country that has signed the convention, in uniform so as to be “clearly distinguished from the civilian population” and carry an ID card.
OK ….how are you doing so far?
In WWII …1943 …a German sub landed 4 guys on a beach just soth of Jax. They were caught interrogated and executed. No uniform, no ID….no G.Convention protection.
Getting it yet?
Abu Grab….dispicable conduct and 20 years in Leavenworth is what the guards got and what they deserve. Idiots are in every Army. This was a failure of leadership. No one in command ever visited on the night shift…..bad idea.
However, the prisoners were common crimnals …not soldiers. So guess what….no G. Convention rules applied…..sure the rules of common decency and respect that should be afforded prisoners in our own jail system ..but not G Convention rules.
As I said in my original post …you guys hate Bush…..it's your priviledge as an American to do so but you are missing the point.
Facts are a hard thing….there is only one set….you can have your opinion about them …but there is only one set.
So get your facts straight before quoting the G. Convention.
It would also be helpful if you left your liberalism and Bush hatred at home before coming to the marketplace of ideas.