Bush May Have Authorized Torture Via Executive Order. ACLU Obtains New Docs.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

The ACLU has gotten its grubby, liberal hands on some new documents through a Freedom of Information lawsuit.

A two-page FBI e-mail message refers to “a Presidential Executive Order” and contends President George W. Bush directly authorized interrogation techniques that included sleep deprivation, stress positions, the use of military dogs and “sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc.,” the ACLU said.

The FBI message was sent in May 2004 from “On Scene Commander – Baghdad” to senior FBI officials.

The techniques are "beyond the bounds of FBI practice but within the parameters of the executive order … " The message said some FBI personnel witnessed the use of the techniques but did not participate.

A White House mouthpiece is denying that any such Executive Order ever existed and claiming that the agent who wrote the email was “mistaken.”

There’s some other bizarre shit in these documents too:

The ACLU also released other records Monday obtained in the suit, including an FBI e-mail message that characterizes methods used by the Defense Department as “torture” and an “Urgent Report” to the FBI director that raises concerns abuse of detainees is being covered up.

The ACLU said another e-mail message, dated December 2003, “describes an incident in which Defense Department interrogators at Guantanamo Bay impersonated FBI agents while using ‘torture techniques’ against a detainee. The message concludes 'If this detainee is ever released or his story made public in any way, DOD interrogators will not be held accountable because these torture techniques were done (by) the ‘FBI’ interrogators. The FBI will (be) left holding the bag before the public.”

Direct link to docs on ACLU site.

It probably goes without saying that I dismiss the White House denial out of hand but I think it would still be useful to interview the agent who referred to an “Executive Order” and assertain whether he confused those words with some other words, like…like…I don’t know…what other authority would have “parameters” which would supercede the FBI? Does the DoD have authority over the FBI?

I almost put this in the Pit as a rant but I think I’m going to show some uncharacteristic restraint and put it in GD because the facts still seem to be somewhat unclear.

I think that regardless of whether Bush was directly involved, it’s pretty clear that the DoD was into some pretty dark areas (which of course brings us once again to the monument to incompetence that is Donald Rumsfeld).

So anyway, what if it can be shown that Bush actually did give an EO to use torture? Is it impeachable? Will it matter at all to Bush supporters? Shouldn’t Rummy be fired?

All opinions welcome.

[Zoe]

Aren’t you glad the people voted based on “moral values”?

I could cry.

I also heard today that there is a CIA prison within GTMO. I wonder if there is a connection between the two.

To whom would he submit the Executive Order? Wouldn’t there be a paper trail?

[Neurotik]

Whoop-de-damn do. As if it will make an ounce of difference. This won’t get much airplay, and if it does, supporters will just dismiss it. The vast majority of Americans either won’t notice or won’t care.

[Little_Nemo]

Follow standard operating procedures:
1 - Deny everything as long as possible. Claim anyone presenting evidence of wrong-doing is biased.
2 - When evidence of wrong-doing becomes undeniable, divert attention by blaming liberals of analogous wrong-doings.
3 - Wait one week. State that accusations are old news and nations needs to move forward. Say that someone will be held responsible but do not actually punish anyone.

[MrFantsyPants]

People who hate bush will say “Look! proof positive that he’s evil”.

People who support Bush will say “whoop de doo. so what”

The world will keep turning. Sad, but true.

[Revtim]

The defenses I heard the most was that people thought it was justified or not a big deal, so they could have footage of Bush himself applying electricity to a prisoner’s balls and it won’t make goddamn bit of difference.

And seeing how the Iraq war’s primary reason for happening turned out to be bullshit and most of its supporters still somehow manage to think it was a good idea without collapsing into a twitching pile of pure liquid cognitive dissonance, they’ll swallow this no problem.

Of course, if he got a blowjob from an intern while ordering illegal torture, then maybe it might a make a difference… But it might have to be a male intern.

[John_Carter_of_Mars]

By Diogenes the Cynic: “There’s some other bizarre shit in these documents too:”

What else would you expect from an ACLU website except bizarre shit? When come back, bring worthy source.

[Miller]

@John Carter of Mars

By Diogenes the Cynic: “There’s some other bizarre shit in these documents too:”

What else would you expect from an ACLU website except bizarre shit? When come back, bring worthy source.

Since when has the ACLU been a disreputable cite?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Carter of Mars

By Diogenes the Cynic: “There’s some other bizarre shit in these documents too:”

What else would you expect from an ACLU website except bizarre shit? When come back, bring worthy source.

The ACLU isn’t the source, the actual documents are the source. I posted a link. You can read the docs for yourself.

[BrainGlutton]

@Diogenes the Cynic

A White House mouthpiece is denying that any such Executive Order ever existed and claiming that the agent who wrote the email was “mistaken.”

Sounds like denying a particular Act of Congress ever existed. But I’m not clear on this point – is every presidential Executive Order public record, or does the administration have the discretion to issue an EO which is classified (or simply not released publicly)? Does anyone know?

[John_Carter_of_Mars]

I should never have opened this thread, let alone posted in it. Apologies.

Have a good one.

[pervert]

@Diogenes the Cynic

I almost put this in the Pit as a rant but I think I’m going to show some uncharacteristic restraint and put it in GD because the facts still seem to be somewhat unclear.

First, allow me to commend your intentions in this thought.

it’s pretty clear that the DoD was into some pretty dark areas

Perhaps I missed the stuff, but this is not clear to me at all. I noticed one mention of witnessing “sleep deprivation” and some mention of strobe lights and loud music. As someone who is very interested in lambasting the administration with this charge, could you point out to me the part about torture?

Sleep deprivation, hoods, loud music and strobe lights do not in and of themselves contitute torture. When used to excess they can be a tool of torture.

So anyway, what if it can be shown that Bush actually did give an EO to use torture?

Well, again, you’ll have to be more specific. If he merely said to use “all methods necessary” or some such thing, then, although it might be construed as an order to torture, it could also be seen as an order to be diligent. More importantly, it seems unlikely that any such order would not have included “within the law” type language.

Is it impeachable?

However, if Bush did in fact order specific officers or their superiors to conduct torture (pulling nails, maiming, something which is clearly accross the line), then it is certainly an impeachable offense. It may be impeachable if the line were less clearly crossed. But I think it would require an unusually high measure of evidence and torture before the political difficulties could be overcome.

Will it matter at all to Bush supporters?

These documents? No. Probably not. The fact is that the vast majority of the population will neither read nor be aware of these documents.

Shouldn’t Rummy be fired?

Over this, no. Over other things, maybe, but IMHO probably not.

All opinions welcome.

Allow me to finish by applauding this sentiment again.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@pervert

First, allow me to commend your intentions in this thought.

Perhaps I missed the stuff, but this is not clear to me at all. I noticed one mention of witnessing “sleep deprivation” and some mention of strobe lights and loud music. As someone who is very interested in lambasting the administration with this charge, could you point out to me the part about torture?

Sleep deprivation, hoods, loud music and strobe lights do not in and of themselves contitute torture. When used to excess they can be a tool of torture.

You forgot to mention the dogs, and yes “stress positions,” sleep deprivation and sensory deprivation are torture. Stress positions, in particular, are a technique for inducing intense physical pain.

The FBI has also said that all of these practices are worthless for obtaining information.

Well, again, you’ll have to be more specific. If he merely said to use “all methods necessary” or some such thing, then, although it might be construed as an order to torture, it could also be seen as an order to be diligent. More importantly, it seems unlikely that any such order would not have included “within the law” type language.

I don’t know. That’s why I want to know what the agent meant by “within the parameters of the Executive Order.” What “parameters” and what “order.” If Bush specificall authorized the above techniques, he authorized torture.

However, if Bush did in fact order specific officers or their superiors to conduct torture (pulling nails, maiming, something which is clearly accross the line), then it is certainly an impeachable offense. It may be impeachable if the line were less clearly crossed. But I think it would require an unusually high measure of evidence and torture before the political difficulties could be overcome.

All of the stuff mentioned in the emails qualifies as “crossing the line.”

[Squink]

@BrainGlutton

Sounds like denying a particular Act of Congress ever existed. But I’m not clear on this point – is every presidential Executive Order public record, or does the administration have the discretion to issue an EO which is classified (or simply not released publicly)? Does anyone know?

Secret executive orders are not rare. Even Clinton wrote some:

Ron Brown insisted that the Commerce Department be one of the master CLIPPER key holders. President Clinton tasked Brown to the project in 1993 in a top-secret executive order. According to Nolinda Hill, Brown was aware that the encryption transfers to China were bordering on treason.

Here’s a direct link to the PDF of the Memo discussing Bush’s Secret Torture EO.

The details the memo relates of the changes made to the order after Abu Ghraib broke, make the white house’s position that such an EO does not exist highly implausible.

[Brutus]

@Diogenes the Cynic

The FBI has also said that all of these practices are worthless for obtaining information…

Information that is useable in court, perhaps.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Any information.

[elucidator]

Information? Sure, the tortured will ultimately tell you whatever you want. But what good can it be? Any clandestine organization worth shit knows Rule One: if one of your people is caught, assume that the other side knows everything he knows. This is true if your enemy is the KGB, the Gestapo, the secret police of Greater Serbia, all of them. The information your informant has is obsolete the moment you lay hands on him. And that excludes the high probability of your informant making stuff up just to get you to stop hurting him.

So on top of being vile and repulsive, it is also useless.

That said, I’ve got some suspicions about this. Number one, where is the deniability? GeeDubya, in Dennis Millers apt phrase, surrounds himself with smart people like a doughnut hole surrounds itself with doughnut. Someone would have had to say “Don’t do it, Mr. President. Don’t sign nothin’. You got people for that, people who know that the price to be a Big Shot is that you may have to fall on your sword. A wink, a nod, a word in the right ear, is all that needs be done.”

So I’m not buying any, not yet. Now, if you’re asking did the President set the tone, give a “the gloves come off, now we get tough” signal by inference and implication? Sure thing. But that’s all he has to do. Ask him tomorrow if he authorized torture, and he can look you right in the eye and say “No”. And be telling the truth.

It hardly matters, given the preponderance of events that have been proven, the world at large will believe it. That many more enemies, that many fewer friends. Remember the candlelight vigils, the worldwide expressions of sympathy after 9/11? For a while there, we had the whole fucking world on our side, and these assholes piss it all away so they can play at being Tough Guys. Pampered, privileged frat boys who think they have “street cred.” Jesus wept.

So it doesn’t make any real difference whether its true or not, it would be denied anyway. Given the way we’ve been behaving lately, who’s going to believe us?

[picker]

@Brutus

Information that is useable in court, perhaps.

Well, considering that of the 650 prisoners believed to be at Gitmo, 4 (four!) of them have been charged in almost three years - and none taken to trial as of yet - I rather think that admissibility of evidence is not a priority of the interrogators.

YMMV.

[pervert]

@Diogenes the Cynic

You forgot to mention the dogs, and yes “stress positions,” sleep deprivation and sensory deprivation are torture. Stress positions, in particular, are a technique for inducing intense physical pain.

Well, that could be. It depends on what sort of stress positions you are talking about. If you mean a prisoner was kept standing for several hours, for instance, I’m not really sure that qualifies. If, however, you mean that he was kept standing for several days, thats a bruise of a different color.

My question, however, was if you knew where in them emails such things were mentioned. I did not see any. I’m absolutely not saying they aren’t in there, but I missed them. If you could tel me which email talked about stress positions or dogs I’d appreciate it.

The FBI has also said that all of these practices are worthless for obtaining information.

In those same emails? Or is this in another paper? The problem is that the words we use to describe torture techniques also mean things which are not torture. We have to be sure that this FBI statement you are refering to was in fact refering to the same sorts of practices.

I don’t know. That’s why I want to know what the agent meant by “within the parameters of the Executive Order.” What “parameters” and what “order.” If Bush specificall authorized the above techniques, he authorized torture.

I agree. Unfortunately the article is terribly unspecific. I’ve found that almost all news sources are this way. I appreciate very much, BTW, your linking directly to the emails in question.

All of the stuff mentioned in the emails qualifies as “crossing the line.”

Well, that’s not true. Many of the practices are removed. How do we know they cross the line? Unless, of course, you are refering to specific actions mentioned in the emails. If so, could you narrow it down to the most obvious line crosser? I admit that I did not read every word, but I did scan them all, and I read the first several. I simiply did not see anything which could not be considered much more than agresive interogation.

[rjung]

Turn on those recorders, boys – listening to the right-wing pundits and Bush apologists spin this one will be a memorable experience…