Comments on: Bush Administration Torture Details: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Waterboarded 183 Times

By: orwell2112

orwell2112 — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 03:00:50 +0000

Sept. 11 mastermind was waterboarded 183 times to remove head lice, say former Bush administration officials

http://wineandexcrement.com/sept-11-mastermind-...

WASHINGTON – Responding to Justice Department memos declassified by the Obama administration last week, former Bush administration officials claim that CIA agents who repeatedly waterboarded Sept. 11 planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were not bent on torture but simply treating a raging case of head lice and dandruff ...

By: RevDave

RevDave — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:07:36 +0000

Bybee is a federal appeals judge – minimum these clowns should be removed from the court and the bar and treated like the criminals that they are.

By: StockBoySF

StockBoySF — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 01:05:47 +0000

At the very least the architects (lawyers and former top Bush administration officials who supported it) need to be punished.

And without getting into an Abu Ghraib debate.... It was the Bush WH that put into place the ingredients which led to the Abu Ghraib abuses. The military started the Abu Ghraib investigation back in 2003, halfway through Bush's first term.... And Bush has lied about torture ever since.

I bet that if Abu Ghraib had not come to light as early as it had then there would have been many more instances of torture.

I see Abu Ghraib (and Gitmo which happened about the same time) as the beginning of something that was thankfully nipped in the bud.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:54:03 +0000

Who is he going to piss off that isn't already in Tea Party/Hissy Fit mode? Three months into office and Republican politicians are advocating secession and violence in opposition to Obama.

By: DaGoat

DaGoat — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:47:44 +0000

When I read KSM was waterboarded 183 I have the same reaction as when the Abu Ghraib photos came out – namely to an extent we became that which we were fighting. I know many servicemen and still believe Abu Ghraib was a fairly isolated occurrence (I don't want to get in an Abu Ghraib argument here), but this is different in that there is an obvious link to higher levels of authority. Somebody deserves to be held accountable here.

From a pragmatic standpoint the responsibility seems to be spread around and I think there lies part of the problem. How do you punish people for doing things government attorneys have told them are acceptable? And can you punish attorneys for giving bad opinions? Skirting the law without actually breaking it is an attorney's stock in trade, it seems to me that is what's happened here.

“Boo Man's” suggestions sound very reasonable but I think he is wearing rose-colored glasses if he thinks government employees will let themselves be fired “quietly”. And the Independent Prosecutor – we've all been down that road and you know it will be a major cluster-F. Congressional hearings are a joke no matter who's in charge. So I don't envy Obama's decision here, does he create a big mess when he has so much else on his plate?

By: GreenDreams

GreenDreams — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:11:16 +0000

i'm with you Chris. I would like to see these creeps brought to justice. I also appreciate that Obama seems to be a good chess player, trying to achieve long term results. And while I don't agree with “end justifies the means” we have other important goals I would not want to see sacrificed. Perhaps he believes making the country even more divided would hinder progress toward more important goals.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:56:06 +0000

GreenDreams,
I'm not saying we should get out the pitchforks, but there is no reason to “give him time”. Obama is a politician, and he'll respond to political pressure. Right now a lot of pro-immunity pressure is coming from powerful places, there needs to be an organized effort to combat it.

By: GreenDreams

GreenDreams — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:22:35 +0000

I'm willing to give him some time. Consider, Chris, that Congressional investigations, and the release of documents like the torture memos create evidence that can be used in prosecutions. Even if the US lacks the will to prosecute, there are civil implications that could cost the architects everything, and the potential of foreign or even world court action later on. I say bring on the evidence. Lay it all bare. And that is happening.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:49:08 +0000

Sil,
With all due respect, Obama needs to be pressured into prosecuting the architects of America's torture program. If torture isn't an offense worthy of prosecution (unlike a BJ from a White House intern), then there is nothing stopping the Obama administration, or future administrations from torturing.

By: Silhouette

Silhouette — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:52:34 +0000

In defense of Obama, I think the words best used are “stay tuned”…

By: GreenDreams

GreenDreams — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:35:42 +0000

very useful summation. Thanks for posting this. And kudos to the Dallas Morning News. Having lived in Dallas, and knowing that paper, I am surprised and heartened that they took the stance they did, which is quite bold for that right-leaning paper.