LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1)...
Nouveau !LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) est désormais compatible avec l'extension FastNews.kiwi disponible pour votre navigateur. Avec cette extension, vérifiez s'il y a des nouveaux sujets sur ce forum en un clic depuis n'importe quelle page ! Cliquez ici pour en savoir plus
Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 29 020
|Posté le: Sam 30 Juil - 14:20 (2011) Sujet du message: LA TORTURE/LA MORT - LES LISTES ROUGES ET BLEUES - P.1
| Posté le 10/04/2007 17:01:34|
LA TORTURE COMMENTAIRE DE MARIA
Je vais aller au plus pressant, car la situation avance maintenant très vite. Voici différents liens sur des articles de presse, qui nous montre très bien vers quel genre de société nous allons. Que déjà plusieurs dérapages ont lieu sous ce nouveau système dictatorial, que de plus en plus de citoyens disparaissent et nul ne sait ce qui leur est arrivé. La répression prend une ampleur telle que maintenant tous les citoyens sont en danger. Nouvelle réalité aux États-Unis d'Amérique mais exemple de ce qui va bientôt arriver dans chacun de nos pays. La torture, mot que l'on croyait bannie sous la Convention de Genève a souvent été bafoué par différents gouvernements depuis la fin de la 2e guerre mondiale. Mais ce à quoi nous assistons maintenant est des plus graves. Des exemples que nous avons pu voir dans différents reportages, sur les tortures dont sont soumis plusieurs prisonniers de Guantanamo et de d'autres camps américains afin de nous convaincre à rester des petites brebis silensieuces.
Je vous donne les liens sur les dernières nouvelles et je rajouterai à mesure, celles qui arriveront afin de vous tenir au courant. Pour des articles en français, aller dans recherche et/ou faites-vous aider par une traduction Internet. Quand j'en aurai, je les mettrai. Faites connaître ces informations qui sont importantes afin de réveiller ceux qui dorment et qui ne voient pas le danger venir!
Je suis certaine que si les milliers de chrétiens à la surface de la Terre prenait le temps d'analyser ceux qui sont à la tête du mouvement mondial chrétien, ils n'enverraient pas leur(s) enfant(s) se faire tuer partout dans le monde au nom d'une fausse Paix. Ils ne supporteraient pas un tel président soutenu par le Conseil Mondial des Églises. Remarquez comme les leaders religieux affiliés au CMÉ sont silencieux sur ce qui se passe. Est-ce normal?
Les chrétiens seraient dans les rues à crier fort qu'un grand danger arrive. Si une armée comme celle de Jéricho se tiendrait debout pour l'Éternel, l'ennemi n'aurait jamais pu avancer ainsi dans ses projets.
Ils prépareraient spirituellement leur famille et eux-même pour faire face à ce qui vient. Malheureusement, ce n'est pas ce qui se passe. Pendant ce temps : Les mouvements de Paix Globale, autre grand piège pour l'humanité, ramasse tout et amènent les populaces vers un piège sans fond.
Voulez-vous être là où Dieu veut que vous soyez? Voulez-vous protéger vos familles où désirez-vous vivre votre petite vie tranquille sans vous préoccuper du lendemain? Pensez-y et prier le Seigneur de vous diriger dans ce combat qui fait rage!
--Message edité par maria le 2007-05-05 19:45:57--
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 10/04/2007 17:16:03|
BUSH ADVISOR SAYS PRESIDENT HAS LEGAL POWER TO TORTURE Mathaba Net | January 9 2006John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles.
This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel.
What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat.
It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo."
This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo’s theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world.
Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.
The audio of this exchange is available online at revcom.us (To open, go to the web link)
Yoo argues presidential powers on Constitutional grounds, but where in the Constitution does it say the President can order the torture of children ?
As David Cole puts it, "Yoo reasoned that because the Constitution makes the President the 'Commander-in-Chief,’ no law can restrict the actions he may take in pursuit of war. On this reasoning, the President would be entitled by the Constitution to resort to genocide if he wished."
What is the position of the Bush Administration on the torture of children, since one of its most influential legal architects is advocating the President’s right to order the crushing of a child’s testicles?
This fascist logic has nothing to do with "getting information" as Yoo has argued. The legal theory developed by Yoo and a few others and adopted by the Administration has resulted in thousands being abducted from their homes in Afghanistan, Iraq or other parts of the world, mostly at random. People have been raped, electrocuted, nearly drowned and tortured literally to death in U.S.-run torture centers in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantánamo Bay. And there is much still to come out. What about the secret centers in Europe or the many still-suppressed photos from Abu Ghraib? What can explain this sadistic, indiscriminate, barbaric brutality except a need to instill widespread fear among people all over the world?
It is ironic that just prior to arguing the President's legal right to torture children, John Yoo was defensive about the Bush administration policies, based on his legal memo’s, being equated to those during Nazi Germany.
Yoo said, "If you are trying to draw a moral equivalence between the Nazis and what the United States is trying to do in defending themselves against Al Qauueda and the 9/11 attacks, I fully reject that. Second, if you’re trying to equate the Bush Administration to Nazi officials who committed atrocities in the holocaust, I completely reject that too…I think to equate Nazi Germany to the Bush Administration is irresponsible."
If open promotion of unmitigated executive power, including the right to order the torture of innocent children, isn’t sufficient basis for drawing such a "moral equivalence," then I don’t know what is. What would be irresponsible is to sit by and allow the Bush regime to radically remake society in a fascist way, with repercussions for generations to come. We must act now because the future is in the balance. The world cannot wait. While Bush gives his State of the Union on January 31st, I’ll find myself along with many thousands across the country declaring "Bush Step Down And take your program with you."
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 10/04/2007 18:05:00|
USA : LES INTERROGATOIRES MUSCLES & LA TORTURE RENDUS LEGAUX FEU VERT AUX INTERROGATOIRES MUSCLES
Source : http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/International/2006/10/17/005-loi-terrorisme-usa.shtml
Les agents de la CIA ont désormais la possibilité de mener des interrogatoires «musclés» sans risque de poursuites. Ils ne pourront toutefois pas aller jusqu'à simuler la noyade des présumés terroristes, une pratique dénoncée par certains sénateurs. Le président George W. Bush vient de promulguer, mardi, sa controversée loi antiterroriste, en ignorant les dénonciations des organisations de défense des droits de l'homme.
Pour l'American Civil Liberties Union, «la nouvelle loi est l'une des pires atteintes aux libertés individuelles jamais promulguées dans l'histoire américaine».
Si la loi interdit plusieurs pratiques d'interrogatoire, elle permet aux agents de la CIA qui participent à ces mêmes interrogatoires d'obtenir une protection légale complète.
Les preuves obtenues sous la torture demeurent interdites. Celles obtenues sous la contrainte sont, elles, limitées et autorisées par un magistrat. Et la différence entre «torture» et «contrainte», c'est le président Bush qui se chargera de la définir.
D'ailleurs, George W. Bush voulait initialement amender la Convention de Genève pour en diluer les passages interdisant la torture et les atteintes à la dignité, et ce n'est que grâce à l'opposition de sénateurs influents que cette dernière tentative a échoué.
La nouvelle loi permet aussi aux autorités américaines de juger les gens sur la base de simples rumeurs ou encore d'autoriser des procès qui peuvent conduire l'accusé à la mort en se servant de témoignages obtenus par la contrainte physique.
Depuis les attentats du 11 septembre 2001, les services secrets américains et la Maison-Blanche ont multiplié les tentatives pour obtenir davantage de latitude dans leur combat contre le terrorisme. En novembre dernier, le Washington Post révélait l'existence de prisons secrètes utilisées par la CIA pour interroger les membres présumés d'Al-Qaïda.
Déjà, des défenseurs des droits de l'homme entendent porter la loi devant les tribunaux pour la faire déclarer inconstitutionnelle.
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 11/04/2007 19:28:47|
INTERNATIONALE DE LA TORTURE : LES DOCUMENTS QUE LA COURONNE BRITANNIQUE VOULAIT CENSURER Source : http://www.voltairenet.org/article141823.html
par Arthur Lepic* Le ministère britannique des Affaires étrangères a fait interdiction à l’ambassadeur Craig Murray de publier des documents en sa possession montrant la responsabilité de la Couronne dans l’Internationale de la torture. Au regard de la nécessité de porter ces documents à la connaissance du public, particulièrement des sujets de Sa Très Gracieuse Majesté, pour défendre la liberté, le Réseau Voltaire a décidé d’apporter son soutien à l’ambassadeur Murray et de braver la censure en publiant les preuves de la culpabilité de la Couronne. Il appelle tous les autres sites d’information à les reprendre à leur tour.
Craig Murray, que nos lecteurs connaissent déjà depuis son intervention à la conférence Axis for Peace de novembre 2005, était ambassadeur de la Couronne britannique en Ouzbékistan jusqu’à sa dénonciation du soutien apporté par l’axe états-uno-britannique au régime tortionnaire d’Islam Karimov sous prétexte de «guerre au terrorisme». Afin de prouver ses dires, il avait même fait acheminer jusqu’au Royaume-Uni et autopsier le corps d’un opposant ouzbèque afin de prouver qu’il avait été ébouillanté vivant.
En plein scandale de la sous-traitance de la torture par la Coalition de la « guerre au terrorisme » à des régimes qui la pratiquent couramment afin de faire taire leur opposition, Craig Murray a bataillé pour faire publier son récit et l’ensemble des éléments à sa disposition sous la forme d’un livre, Murder in Samarkand («Meurtre à Samarkand»), qui contient les preuves, sous forme de documents officiels estampillés par le ministère des Affaires étrangères de Sa Majesté, de l’utilisation par la Coalition de renseignements obtenus sous la torture. Du moins ce livre devait contenir ces preuves, divulguées en vertu du «Freedom of Information Act», car dès sa publication M. Murray se voyait signifier qu’il se verrait intenter un procès pour… enfreinte au droit de reproduction de documents émanant de la Couronne ! Il eût certes été plus simple pour le Foreign Office (ministère des Affaires étrangères britannique) de le poursuivre pour divulgation de secrets d’État, cependant aucun tribunal n’aurait accepté de condamner un militant dénonçant la torture.
Ainsi, de telles poursuites contre M. Murray reviendraient pour le gouvernement de Tony Blair à renier le «Freedom of Information Act» (FOIA) qu’il a lui-même édicté, avant le déclenchement de la « guerre au terrorisme », et à interdire la publication de tout document émanant du gouvernement britannique pendant cent ans (loi sur le copyright), sauf pour une utilisation strictement personnelle.
Menacé d’endettement colossal, M Murray s’est donc résolu à ne faire figurer dans son livre que des liens internet pointant vers les documents accessibles gratuitement sur son site internet, se dédouanant ainsi de toute accusation d’utilisation commerciale de documents étant la propriété d’ «autrui». Évidemment, les menaces n’ont pas cessé pour autant.
À noter que jusqu’à présent, le Foreign Office affirmait que ces documents étaient faux. En insistant sur le fait qu’il en est propriétaire, il en admet aujourd’hui l’authenticité. De plus, les détails des autres modifications demandées par le Foreign Office (voir document 1) sont très révélateurs. Par exemple, a été exigé le retrait de l’affirmation selon laquelle Colin Powell mentait consciemment en affirmant que les attentats de Tashkent étaient l’œuvre d’Al Qaïda , non pas sous prétexte qu’il s’agirait d’un mensonge, mais parce que cela « porterait préjudice aux relations anglo-états-uniennes !
De toute évidence, cette série de quinze documents constitue l’une des preuves les plus accablantes de l’existence d’une « internationale de la torture » chapeautée par la Coalition anglo-saxonne et de la duplicité de la «guerre au terrorisme».
Devant les attaques répétées contre le site internet de M. Murray dès la publication de ces documents, nous avons donc estimé qu’il était important de répondre à l’appel de Craig Murray et de les héberger sur le serveur du Réseau Voltaire. Voici donc l’intégralité de ces documents, incluant les désormais fameux «Télégrammes de Tashkent» ainsi que divers échanges entre Craig Murray et les protagonistes de cette intrigue digne des périodes les plus sombres du vingtième siècle en Europe.
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 12/04/2007 20:02:38|
EXCLUSIVE : «TORTURE TAXIS MAKE REGULAR STOPS IN LAS VEGAS»
This Beech B-200 that flew into the North Las Vegas Airport looked a lot like the other private planes that land every few minutes, but this one had a block on it, meaning it was extremely difficult to track its movements.
Is torture an acceptable tactic to use in the war against terror?The Bush Administration recently acknowledged that some forms of coercion are being used by American agents against suspected terrorists. But human rights advocates say the U.S. is actively supporting the use of more extreme techniques. And the people who are involved are making regular visits to Las Vegas.
This is the story of so called rendition planes, otherwise known as torture taxis. They are civilian aircraft often owned by companies suspected of being fronts for the CIA. The planes are used to travel abroad, kidnap suspects, and take them to dark places at the ends of the earth, from which few ever return.
It sounds like a faraway intrigue, except these alleged torture planes have made Las Vegas a regular pit stop. The I-Team has the video to prove it.
The Beech B-200 that flew into the North Las Vegas Airport on a warm July afternoon looked a lot like the other private planes that land every few minutes, but this one had a block on it, meaning it was extremely difficult to track its movements.
The I-Team watched as its pilot unloaded bag after bag and then loaded them all into a waiting Clark County van. The identity of the pilot isn't known, but we know plenty about the plane.
Trevor Paglen said, "These planes show up in and around Las Vegas fairly regularly. The Beech craft you photographed, we see a lot. It's quite clearly controlled by CIA, if not out rightly owned by CIA."
Trevor Paglen is a doctoral candidate at University of California, Berkeley and the author of the book about the so-called torture taxis, or what the CIA calls rendition planes.
Trevor Paglen said, "What this means in normal English is kidnapping people."
Prior to 9/11, the CIA used rendition planes to snatch terror suspects and bring them to the U.S. for trial. After 9/11, in the words of one CIA official, the gloves came off.
Today, there are no trials, no extraditions. Using an ever-changing array of fictitious companies, the CIA has created a fleet of rendition planes that have been used to kidnap and then transport hundreds of suspected terrorists to secret prisons operating inside the world's most brutal regimes.
The prisons have been described as hellholes where horrible tortures are inflicted. Surrogates do the dirty work so the Americans can deny involvement.
It can be argued that America needs to be tough on terrorists, but too often, the wrong guys get scooped up and then tortured. Khaled al Masri, a German citizen, was a kidnapped off the street and flown to a secret prison near Kabul, Afghanistan. He was tortured for five months but was released after his tormenters realized they had the wrong guy.
Al Masri filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government, as well as against a Reno, Nevada company called Keeler and Tate, the listed owner of the plane used to transport al Masri. The plane is so well known to aviation watchers that it has a nickname - the Guantanamo Express.
Keeler and Tate is a company in name only. Its listed owner doesn't exist. Before the plane was transferred to this company, it was owned by other phony companies linked to the CIA.
The same is true for a Gulf Stream jet we spotted in October at McCarran Airport. It used to be owned by Braxton Management, but was recently sold to a Montana, LLC. Its numbers have been changed, but this same plane is a regular fixture on the rendition route, repeatedly visiting places known to house secret prisons. It's also a Las Vegas regular, often jumping from McCarran to Nellis and back, sometimes staying only a few minutes.
The little Beech craft seen at North Las Vegas is owned by aviation specialties, another shell company widely known as a CIA front. Why the rendition planes are visiting here so often is anyone's guess. But there is little doubt they are part of a program that has ignited scorn and disgust all over the world.
Trevor Paglen said, "The question is not who they are. We already know a lot of these are bad guys. The question is who are we? Are we going to become like them? We're saying yes, this is who we are. We want to torture people, disappear people and this will become a normal part of what the U.S. government does, and that is very frightening."
European leaders, even strong allies of the U.S., have called for an end to rendition flights after highly publicized incidents where CIA agents abducted private citizens right off the streets of several countries without seeking legal authority to act.
One reason for so many rendition flights to La Vegas is the possibility that the planes are being used to transport counter-terrorism commands for training here, perhaps at the Nevada Test Site. The planes are reportedly used for functions other than the transports of prisoners.
Send your comments to Investigative Reporter George Knapp at email@example.com
--Message edité par maria le 2009-02-03 13:59:06--
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 13/04/2007 12:22:10|
AMERICAN DISSIDENT PRISONS
AMERICAN DISSIDENT PRISONS
«...il mangeait, brisait, et il foulait aux pieds ce qui restait ;...» Dan. 7 : 7
November 11th, 2006 Pam Schuffert
Pam Schuffert. Since 1996, Pam has been consistently investigating, confirming and reporting that there are thousands of prisoner boxcars with shackles, manufactured out of Portland, OR by GUNDERSON STEEL FABRICATION (and other separate boxcar manufacturing companies/operations located nationwide).
Pam say's there is a COMING HOLOCAUST to North America. She believes that an INFORMED citizen is an ALERTED and ACTIVATED citizen who is no longer deceived nor controlled by government/military influenced "news media bias" and "news media black-out."
She speaks on The Edge to enable you to become sufficiently prepared, both physically and spiritually, to withstand and overcome the shocking events to soon unfold in North America (the US and Canada), intended to bring North America under THE NEW WORLD ORDER...or, Satan's manifest kingdom on earth (REVELATION chapter 13 in the Bible.)
Call her at : 406.871.0762
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
BECAUSE THEY CAN: THE LOGIC OF THE TORTURE STATE
| Posté le 15/05/2007 11:44:27|
by William Norman Grigg
“This is your god!”
That profane outburst fell from the lips of Pfc. Damien M. Corsetti – aka “Monster,” aka “King of Torture” – as he straddled a helpless Saudi detainee in a Soviet-constructed Afghan prison. Corsetti had just threatened to rape the detainee, and the supposed deity he referred to was the appendage with which he would commit that act. At the time, said appendage was pressed against the prisoner's face.
Read more : http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w12.html
--Message edité par maria le 2007-05-15 11:44:45--
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
DOCUMENTS CHOCS IMPORTANTS QUI VOUS DÉMONTRERONT QUEL GENRE D'ENTRAÎNEMENT PSYCHOLOGIQUE REVOIVENT LES MILITAIRES, AVEC L'AIDE DE PSYCHANALISTES, AFIN DE LUTTER EFFICACEMENT CONTRE LE «TERRORISME» ET LES «ENNEMIS COMBATTANTS.» BIENVENUE DANS LE MONDE DE L'ENFER SUR TERRE!!!
| Posté le 31/05/2007 09:07:01|
SHRINKS AND THE SERE TECHNIQUE AT GUANTANAMO
Pentagon IG Report Details Central Role of Psychologists in Detainee Interrogations and Abuse STEPHEN SOLDZ
Tuesday May 29, 2007
The Defense Department (DoD) has just declassified a report from their Inspector General (OIG) looking at the various investigations that the Department has conducted into repeated claims of detainee abuse--a.k.a. "torture" and "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment"--banned by international and United States law. The report documents that the various DoD "investigations were, individually and in total, inadequate:
Read more : http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/290507_b_Guantanamo.htm
PSYCHOANALYSTS FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE
Because we know the destructiveness that resides in each of us, we know the importance of not letting it destroy what we hold dear...A member organization of United for Peace and Justice
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 20/08/2007 17:41:16|
US PSYCHOLOGISTS SCRAP INTERROGATION BAN SUDHIN THANAWALA AP
Monday Aug 20, 2007
SAN FRANCISCO - The nation's largest group of psychologists scrapped a measure Sunday that would have prohibited members from assisting interrogators at Guantanamo Bay and other U.S. military detention centers.
The American Psychological Association's policy-making council voted against a proposal to ban psychologists from taking part in any interrogations at U.S. military prisons "in which detainees are deprived of adequate protection of their human rights."
Instead, the group approved a resolution that reaffirmed the association's opposition to torture and restricted members from taking part in interrogations that involved any of more than a dozen specific practices, including sleep deprivation and forced nakedness. Violators could be expelled and lose their state licenses to practice.
Critics of the proposed ban who spoke before the vote at the 148,000-member organization's annual meeting said the presence of psychologists would help insure interrogators did not abuse prisoners.
"If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are going to die," said Army Col. Larry James, who serves as a psychologist at Guantanamo Bay.
Supporters argued that psychologists should not be working at detention centers where prisoners are detained indefinitely without being charged.
"If psychologists have to be there so detainees don't get killed, those conditions are so horrendous that the only moral and ethical thing is to leave," said Laurie Wagner, a psychologist from Dallas.
The association's vote follows reports that mental health specialists were involved in prisoner abuse scandals at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
BILL CLINTON: "TORTURE LIKE ON 24 IS OK"
| Posté le 02/10/2007 17:07:21|
America needs more Jack Bauer like agents says former President
Monday, Oct 1, 2007
Former president Bill Clinton has told NBC's Meet The Press that America needs more intelligence agents who make their own rules and engage in whatever actions are necessary like Jack Bauer from the fictional TV show 24.
"I think what our policy ought to be is to be uncompromisingly opposed to terror--I mean to torture, and that if you're the Jack Bauer person, you'll do whatever you do and you should be prepared to take the consequences... And I think the consequences will be imposed based on what turns out to be the truth." Clinton said.
"If you have any kind of a formal exception, people just drive a truck through it, and they'll say, 'Well, I thought it was covered by the exception,'" Clinton added.
The question was again raised by host Tim Russert after Clinton told him last year that he would authorize torture in a "ticking bomb 24"-style situation.
Clinton went on to state “If you look at the show, every time they get the president to approve something, the president gets in trouble, the country gets in trouble. And when Bauer goes out there on his own and is prepared to live with the consequences, it always seems to work better.".
Clinton's comments represent another case of an influential political figure discussing the benefits of torture in the context of a fictional TV show character.
Earlier this year Supreme Court judge Antonin Scalia also used the analogy at a panel discussion on torture, stating "Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles. ... He saved hundreds of thousands of lives... Are you going to convict Jack Bauer? Say that criminal law is against him? ‘You have the right to a jury trial?’ Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer? I don’t think so.”
We are more used to this kind of dross from Fox News. For example, Laura Ingraham has previously stated that the average American's love of the show is a referendum for the use of torture against anyone considered to be with "Al Qaeda" whether they be American citizens or not. Watch it:
VIDEO : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkMI5t6WVMs
24 has routinely depicted scenes of detainee torture, as well as plot-lines broaching the issue of the detention of American citizens in a time of crisis.
At a time when legislation such as The Patriot Act and The Military Commissions Act are setting the precedent for the detention of American citizens, and in the absence of any real terror 24 serves as the perfect dose of fear-mongering propaganda to encourage acceptance of such attacks upon the fabric of freedom.
24, Threat Matrix, Spooks, and other such shows are contributions to a conditioning mechanism that present torture as a reasonable and ethical method. However, in every case of torture that has come to light in the real world there isn't even a basis of "situational ethics" to justify this with.
Click here http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2004/051604jonesontorture.htm to watch a video clip in which Alex Jones explains the hypocrisy of torture and why the doublethink of the "it's bad when the enemy does it but good when we do it" mentality is so dangerous.
Finally, should we really have to endure BIll Clinton, an impeached former president who has been accused of rape and molestation, speaking on "facing consequences" for one's actions based on "what turns out to be the truth"?
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 08/10/2007 18:28:48|
US MARSHALLS: TORTURE & TERRORISM IN AMERICA From: albertDate: Oct 7, 2007 4:14 PM
The harassment and torture that befell Congressman Hansen came from prison officials, in the form of neglect for serious medical problems and health hazards in the prison work place. The torture also came from the Federal Marshals who cruelly transported him from one prison to another.
Political prisoners (ED: Political prisoners? In America?? You betcha!!!) and those who are considered trouble makers arc given what prisoners call, "diesel therapy". "Diesel therapy" consists of being put on diesel busses or airplanes and being transported from prison to prison for weeks and months at a time (ED: ALL at the expense of the taxpayers!).
On the surface it sounds benign. What could be the problem with making a prisoner ride in a bus for hours at a time?
Torture American Style
Before the prisoner is put on the bus, he is put in handcuffs and shackles (leg irons). The handcuffs are tightened by a black box that stiffens the chains and puts the wrists in a 90 degree bind that painfully cuts circulation and damages the nerves. It takes several weeks for the circulation and nerves to return to normal. The handcuffs are connected with chains to a waist chain, which is in turn connected by another chain to the shackles which go around the ankles The prisoner can barely move once the shackling process is complete.
He is then placed in a small seat on a bus or airplane. (ED: George Hansen is a BIG man, standing well over 6'-3" and -- before his ordeal -- tipping the scales at well over 220 pounds.) Because of the shackles, the prisoner is forced to sit in one position for up to 20 hours at a time. And the guards will rarely go to the trouble of unshackling a prisoner. Prisoners who understand "diesel therapy" know that "fasting" is the only way to handle the ordeal without messing or wetting yourself.
But even those who are smart enough to abstain from food and drink, still have to suffer the stench of urine and feces which soon fills the bus or plane.
One other painful aspect of diesel therapy is the shoes that prisoners are forced to wear. They become too small. The cramped position and tight shackles cause the feet and ankles to swell. The shackles cut into the legs and cut off circulation. The blood pools in the feet and causes the feet to swell. The toes are forced up against the tops of the too small shoes, and unbelievable pressure is put on the toenails. The toenails soon become deformed, infected and painful.
Each day the metal shackles are put back onto raw and infected legs before the prisoner boards the bus. After weeks and months of diesel therapy, the ankles and shins have raw, infected and open wounds that will not heal.
Hour after hour, the prisoner sits in a cramped & painful position, with shackles cutting into already infected, raw flesh. Arthritis and bursitis compound the misery of the prisoners. The ingrown, infected toenails, which are jammed inside of purposely small shoes, cripple the prisoner to the point that he can barely walk or move when he is finally released from the shackles.
During the weeks and months of diesel therapy, the prisoner is out of contact with the rest of the world. In the case of Congressman Hansen, his wife did not know if he was dead or alive. His lawyer could not find him and therefore could not file court papers on time. Even the members of congress who were still trying to help him, could not locate him. During his diesel therapy" he disappeared into the black hole dug and run by the United States Marshals.
After "diesel therapy", Hansen was forced to operate on his feet himself. His toenails were so deformed that they pointed straight up. He could not wear shoes without excruciating pain. The only remedy that was open to him was to pull the toenails out by the roots. Our prisoners of war in SE Asia had their fingernails and toenails pulled out by their torturers. Congressman Hansen had to become his own torturer in an effort to stop the pain.
Several weeks ago, Congressman Hansen was testifying before his former colleagues in the House of Representatives. He told the story of his trip into Iran during the Iran hostage crisis in 1979. He was the only United States official to get into Iran to try to negotiate an end to the crisis.
While he was there, he was shown the horrible human suffering that was inflicted upon the Iranian people by the Shah of Iran and his secret police.
He told his former colleagues about the horrors of the Shah's torture chambers. Ankles that had been smashed by heavy clubs. Legs that had been smashed and permanently scarred. Hands and feet that had no nails because they were repeatedly pulled out.
Then he stood up and walked around in front of his table. Leaning lightly on the table, he pulled up his pant leg and showed his former colleagues the raw, red scars on his own legs -- scars that stretched many inches, from his ankles up his shin bones. He told his former colleagues about his toenails, which have never grown back properly. He ended his "show and tell" session by informing the House that they did not have to travel to foreign countries to witness torture. All they had to do is visit any American prison and they would quickly find the effects of purposeful abuse and neglect on certain prisoners.
If his former colleagues have any sense, they will quickly reform the prison system, before any more of them end up there.
The scars on his legs and the lack of toenails were minor problems for Hansen. The major pain came from his teeth and deteriorating bones. These problems came from hazardous chemicals he was forced to work around during his job assignment in the prison power plant. The chemicals caused his bones to weaken and his teeth to become infected and turn to mush. (ED: Where oh where is OSHA and the EPA when ya' REALLY need 'em?). The pain' of abscessed teeth was unbearable. To be able to function each day, without even an aspirin to dull the pain, he picked up a plastic cap used to splice electric wires. He placed the cap in the infected area and bit down on it all day and night.
During his four years in prison, he lost most of his teeth through willful neglect on the part of the prison officials.
Hansen was forced to sell his homes in Virginia and Idaho. Everything he and his wife had accumulated during years of hard work went to lawyers or to pay the fine. Even though his retirement was not supposed to be touched, through some nefarious deal, it was tapped to pay fines, thereby denying his wife the means to live. She was approaching sixty, had a heart condition and diabetes, but she was put out of her home and didn't even have the money to rent an apartment. With the help of their children and a job, she just barely made ends meet until Hansen was released.
They are now in their 60s and they are starting over with nothing. He still has health problems associated with prison life, and still needs further dental work. He drives a leased Honda and lives with his wife in a rented apartment.
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 08/10/2007 18:42:12|
BUSH SAYS TORTURE IS GOOD October 8, 2007 - 5:55am. President defends use of 'harsh' interrogation techniques
President George W. Bush (AP Photo)
By JENNIFER LOVEN
President Bush defended his administration's methods of detaining and questioning terrorism suspects on Friday, saying both are successful and lawful.
"When we find somebody who may have information regarding a potential attack on America, you bet we're going to detain them, and you bet we're going to question them," he said during a hastily called Oval Office appearance. "The American people expect us to find out information, actionable intelligence so we can help protect them. That's our job."
Bush volunteered his thoughts on a report on two secret 2005 memos that authorized extreme interrogation tactics against terror suspects. "This government does not torture people," the president said.
Meanwhile, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., demanded a copy of a third Justice Department memo justifying military interrogations of terror suspects held outside the United States.
In a letter to Attorney General-nominee Michael Mukasey, Levin wrote that two years ago he requested — and was denied — the March 14, 2003, legal opinion. Levin asked if Mukasey would agree to release the opinion if the Senate confirms him as attorney general, and cited what he described as a history of the Justice Department stonewalling Congress.
"Such failures and the repeated refusal of DoJ to provide Congress with such documents has prevented the Congress from fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities to conduct oversight," Levin wrote.
The White House said Mukasey has not been cleared to read the classified documents Levin requested.
The two Justice Department legal opinions from 2005 were disclosed in Thursday's editions of The New York Times, which reported that the first opinion authorized the use of painful methods, such as head slaps, freezing temperatures and simulated drownings known as waterboarding, in combination.
That secret opinion came months after a December 2004 opinion in which the Justice Department publicly declared torture "abhorrent" and the administration seemed to back away from claiming authority for such practices, and after the withdrawal of a 2002 classified Justice opinion that had allowed certain aggressive interrogation practices so long as they stopped short of producing pain equivalent to experiencing organ failure or death.
The second Justice opinion was issued later in 2005, just as Congress was working on an anti-torture bill. The opinion declared that none of the CIA's interrogation practices would violate provisions in the legislation banning "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of detainees, The Times said, citing interviews with unnamed current and former officials.
Though both memos remain in effect, the White House insisted they represented no change from the 2004 policy.
"We stick to U.S. law and international obligations," Bush said, without taking questions after a brief picture-taking session.
Speaking emphatically, the president noted that "highly trained professionals" conduct any questioning. "And by the way," he said, "we have gotten information from these high-value detainees that have helped protect you."
"The American people expect their government to take action to protect them from further attack," Bush said. "And that's exactly what this government is doing. And that's exactly what we'll continue to do."
He also said the techniques used by the United States "have been fully disclosed to appropriate members of the United States Congress" — an indirect slap at the torrent of criticism that has flowed from the Democratic-controlled Congress since the disclosure of the memos.
White House press secretary Dana Perino said those briefed on Capitol Hill "are satisfied that the policy of the United States and the practices do not constitute torture." She refused to define, however, what would be considered torture, or off-limits, in interrogations.
"I just fundamentally disagree that that would be a good thing for national security," she said. "I think the American people recognize that there are needs that the federal government has to keep certain information private in order to help their national security. ... We cannot provide more information about techniques. It's not appropriate."
CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden issued a memo to agency employees Friday that said the CIA has not withheld information from Congress and the legal opinion has not "opened the door" to harsher interrogation techniques than the law allows.
But House and Senate Democrats disagree that there is sufficient clarity on the matter, and are demanding to see the memos.
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-WVa., said in a statement Friday he is "tired of these games."
"They can't say that Congress has been fully briefed while refusing to turn over key documents used to justify the legality of the program," Rockefeller said.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., promised a congressional inquiry.
Another White House spokesman, meanwhile, criticized the leak of such information to the news media and questioned the motivations of those who do so.
"It's troubling," White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said Friday. "I've had the awful responsibility to have to work with The New York Times and other news organizations on stories that involve the release of classified information. And I can tell you that every time I've dealt with any of these stories, I have felt that we have chipped away at the safety and security of America with the publication of this kind of information."
The CIA has interrogated fewer than 100 "hardened" terrorists and has used "special methods of questioning" on a third of them, according to Hayden.
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 24/10/2007 07:36:06|
CIA INTERROGATIONS YIELDED 9,000 REPORTS: HAYDEN Wednesday, October 24, 2007By Jeff Bliss, Bloomberg
WASHINGTON -- The CIA's questioning of fewer than 100 terrorist suspect detainees has yielded about 9,000 reports, showing the success of the interrogation program, according to the head of the agency.
The information was obtained using techniques within the boundaries of U.S. law and didn't include torture, Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael Hayden said in an interview on "Charlie Rose" to be broadcast later tonight.
The reports "comprise some of the most critical information we've ever gained on al-Qaeda," Hayden said. "If you accept the premise that torture doesn't work, then you have to accept the fact that this did work."
The U.S. and the CIA, in particular, have been accused by lawmakers, civil-rights groups and detainees of employing harsh methods, including waterboarding, a technique that simulates drowning. Hayden reiterated that the CIA has changed its methods in the past few years, although he declined to say how the agency is operating differently.
Less than a third of the detainees were subjected to "enhanced interrogation," Hayden said. U.S. law allows the CIA to use more extreme techniques than those detailed in the Army Field Manual, he said.
Hayden also said the CIA has sent fewer terrorist suspects to be imprisoned in other countries since the Sept. 11 attacks than in the 1990s. While not divulging how many were sent to prisons abroad -- a move known as a rendition -- Hayden said the number was "mid-range, two figures."
About 70 renditions occurred before Sept. 11, 2001, most under the administration of President Bill Clinton, according to the Washington Post, citing former CIA Director George Tenet.
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 25/10/2007 06:19:57|
TERROR WATCH LIST SWELLS TO MORE THAN 755,000 By Mimi Hall, USA TODAYWASHINGTON — The government's terrorist watch list has swelled to more than 755,000 names, according to a new government report that has raised worries about the list's effectiveness.
The size of the list, typically used to check people entering the country through land border crossings, airports and sea ports, has been growing by 200,000 names a year since 2004. Some lawmakers, security experts and civil rights advocates warn that it will become useless if it includes too many people.
"It undermines the authority of the list," says Lisa Graves of the Center for National Security Studies. "There's just no rational, reasonable estimate that there's anywhere close to that many suspected terrorists."
The exact number of people on the list, compiled after 9/11 to help government agents keep terrorists out of the country, is unclear, according to the report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Some people may be on the list more than once because they are listed under multiple spellings.
Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., who plans a hearing on the report today, says "serious hurdles remain if (the list) is to be as effective as we need it to be. Some of the concerns stem from its rapid growth, which could call into question the quality of the list itself."
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Senate | Government | Government Accounting Office | Joe Lieberman | Senate Homeland Security
About 53,000 people on the list were questioned since 2004, according to the GAO, which says the Homeland Security Department doesn't keep records on how many were denied entry or allowed into the country after questioning. Most were apparently released and allowed to enter, the GAO says.
Leonard Boyle, director of the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, which maintains the list, says in testimony to be given today that 269 foreigners were denied entry in fiscal 2006.
The GAO report also says:
•The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) could not specify how many people on its no-fly list, which is a small subset of the watch list, might have slipped through screening and been allowed on domestic flights.
•TSA data show "a number of individuals" on the no-fly list passed undetected through screening and boarded international flights bound for the United States. Several planes have been diverted once officials realized that people named on the watch lists were on board.
•Homeland Security has not done enough to use the list more broadly in the private sector, where workers applying for jobs in sensitive places such as chemical factories could do harm.
Boyle also urges that the list be used by for screening at businesses where workers could "carry out attacks on our critical infrastructure that could harm large numbers of persons or cause immense economic damage."
But the sheer size of the watch list raised the most alarms.
"They are quickly galloping towards the million mark — a mark of real distinction because the list is already cumbersome and is approaching absolutely useless," said Tim Sparapani of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, says "creating and maintaining a comprehensive terrorist watch list is an enormous endeavor fraught with technical and tactical challenges."
The report, she says, "underscores the need to make the watch lists more accurate, to improve screening procedures at airports and the ports of entry, and to provide individuals with the ability to seek redress if they believe they have been wrongfully targeted."
| maria Administrateur|
Messages postés : 20960
| Posté le 25/10/2007 06:34:58|
QUELQUES BONS COMMENTAIRES SUR L'ARTICLE PRÉCÉDENT POUR VOUS DÉMONTRER LES EXCÈS ET LES MÉCONTENTEMENTS QUI PEUVENT SURVENIR 1. af7 wrote: 37m ago As inconvenient as it is for some people, this ruined my career. I used to be a consultant with Accenture and travelled constantly, including internationally. Having to spend 6 to 7 hours every single week at special registration desks (in many cases for hour-long domestic flights) became so impractical given my 50 to 65 hour weeks that I had to quit and take a desk job.
The ultimate irony is that Accenture, the consulting firm i used to work for, is the firm responsible for the safe borders program. Having seen the quality of our work, I'm not surprised the watchlist is such a mess.
2. Mad wrote: 13h 12m ago
I met a guy from the State Dept once that told me his job was inputing names on the 'no fly' type list. He told me he routinely included people from his life that he felt wronged him. Past girlfriends, teachers he never liked, even his landlord are no not allowed to fly. No amount of investigation will show why they have been denied, and good luck clearing it up.
3. Pdubya wrote: 14h 48m ago
thats roughly 300 people in my county alone. hmmm, hope i'm on the top of the list since i'm speaking out against this administration.....fascists.
4. Bill T. wrote: 19h 21m ago
It is my guess, that the majority of names on the list are American citizens like myself who has visited or corresponded with other countries, and are not actuallynot Muslims. I'm sure I am on the list as I stated earlier, customs checked my pass-port on the computor as I was returning from Dubai. I also know that there are at least 8 other people with the same first, middle and last name, so, they too may get flagged when they travel, by mistake. It is just another dose of eye wash to try to convince the sheep that the shephard is doing his job.
5. Tar and Feathers wrote: 19h 38m ago
"It is very handy to have laws that make everyone a criminal"
Can't recall who said that, paraphrased I'm sure. Probably Hitler or Goering. Maybe Bush.
6. Jordan Ali wrote: 20h 59m ago
Robert123456789 wrote: 12m ago
HOLY MOLEY THAT IS MORE than the military we have in iraq ! we are so screwed !
BUT nobody knows who is on the list or why they are suspected terrorists etc. The list has been questioned since 2004.
|Posté le: Sam 30 Juil - 14:20 (2011) Sujet du message: Publicité
Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 29 020
|Posté le: Sam 10 Sep - 17:27 (2011) Sujet du message: LA TORTURE/LA MORT - LES LISTES ROUGES ET BLEUES - P.2
Notification par email | Prévenir les modérateursPages : Prec. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Suiv.
|Auteur :||Sujet: LA TORTURE/LA MORT - ET LES LISTES ROUGES ET BLEUES || Bas|
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 10/11/2007 03:47:51 (10/11/2007 12:47:51)|
Jud Witham <jurisnot2@yahoo. com> wrote:
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 07:02:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Jud Witham <jurisnot2@yahoo. com>
SECRET - CHINESE AND NAZI TORTURE TACTIC, COLD BEING SECRETED - BREAKING: HOUSE RESOLUTION TO IMPEACH CHENEY MAY GO TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
To: WindyWanda <windywanda@peoplepc .com>, PressRelease@ restoretherepubl ic.com
They REFUSED to address an old Chinese and Nazi TORTURE tactic, COLD. Even The Israelis OUTLAWED the use of hyper refrigerated COLD CELLING or what some would call Torture by AIRCONDITIONING.
This tactic of SUPER COLD putting a dissident, whistleblower, community activist or CLAIMED ENEMY of the State "ON ICE" is currently a REAL ISSUE and it is being IGNORED by the Senate and Congress and you BETCHA the Bush Cheney Goose Stepper COWBOY GANG.
You see the local FUZZ and the BIG CITY CLOWNS can TORTURE and not leave any marks. Hey look into it, you'll see Old Judson Is NO LIAR.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 10/11/2007 22:29:50 (11/11/2007 07:29:50)|
CHAPTER 70. BUIIDING A U. S. HALL OF INJUSTICE WITH "AQUAPLANK"
By Larry W. Bryant
From a full-page ad in the November-December 2007 issue of the
law-enforcement journal THE INTERROGATOR:
INTRODUCING, from Torture Chamber Systems, Inc. of Enterprise, Ala.: the revolutionary AquaPlank (TM), our state-of-the-art entry into the worldwide waterboarding industry. Constructed of stain-resistant Paraguayan aluminum, this truth-eliciting device now is registered with the U. S. Patent Office.
Back orders are being processed by our small staff as quickly as
possible (to include our federal contract for delivery of no fewer than 10,000 units, by the end of y2k8, to such agencies as the Central Inquisition Agency, the Federal Torture Commission, the National Torture and Sadism Board, and the Department of Fatherland Kontrol). THIS just in: we've received word that the
Cheezeyburton-built mass-detention camps now set to begin operating have ordered several hundred AquaPlanks.
Soon, you, too, can have your very own AquaPlank for use at home oroffice. Its portability, fold-up-storage feature, and easy setupprocedure make it a cinch for training even cub scouts and girlscouts in its operation. (When not being used for its intendedpurpose, the device can serve as a seesaw for your kids orgrandchildren.) Its several add-on options include a sound-recording/broadcast system that replicates some near-death throes of previous recipients of the AquaPlank treatment. One
standard feature of this award-winning waterboard consists of a battery-powered electric-shock module patterned after the old Model-AFord's starter-motor coil. You'll use the shock mode to get the(restrained) recipient's attention, after which (s)he might be morereceptive/subdued when you advance to the board's simulated-drowningphase. Also standard is an accompanying, illustrated operator'smanual composed by a former CIA interrogator now serving on ouradvisory board.
Here's what TCS, Inc. CEO Rev. Dr. Otto Planck has to say about therecent surge in orders: "We certainly welcome this expansion of ourbusiness, and we've decided to issue our Initial Public Offering by year's end. We plan to become the 'Google of the torture industry'!
Of course, we wish to assure the stock-buying public of our professional integrity and quality of our products and services. To that end, we've established an additional criterion for all our newly hired employees: besides having to pass at least one pre-employment polygraph exam, they'll also have to undergo two pre-employment waterboarding sessions -- first as an operator and then as a recipient. This policy tells our customers that not only do we STAND BY our product -- we also LIE DOWN on it.
Thus, you can see that no other company is more committed than we to the institutionalization of waterboarding. As Amerika's revered vice president, Richard "Bunker" Cheney, has said, the AquaPlank is a 'no-brainer' for dealing with current/future terrorists, seditionists, malcontents, heretics, or other dangerous losers."
If you order your unit(s) by Christmas '07, we'll give you 10 percent off the catalog price of the basic-features model -- plus throw in a FREE, red-white-and-blue carrying case (which also can serve as a body bag). Our current unit price for the basic model is $2,611.99; the deluxe model, complete with American flag engravings along each side of the device's main frame, sells for $3,611.99. For phone orders via credit card, call: 1-555-AquaPlanks; send prepaid snail-mail orders to: TCS, Inc., ATTN: AquaPlank Div., P. O. Box 555-AP, Enterprise, AL 36330. For more information, please visit our web site: http://www.tcs-ap.com .
== TCS: The Best in Torture Tools ==
[Author's Note: As the Talibanization of Amerika proceeds apace, who can guess how much more we can lose at the hands of the Bu$ch-Cheezey RICO junta? How wide is the gap between waterboarding and beheading?
While such questions probably won't constitute the thrust of any impeachment hearings contemplated by the House Judiciary Committee now sitting on the powder keg of Rep. Kucinich's Resolution 799 (formerly No. 333), they obviously should be in the back of very mind serving on that committee. If the committee chooses to keep its head in the sand as to acting on H. Res. 799 (as it's been doing since the original resolution's filing in April 2007), then each member should be held accountable for that malign neglect -- by being voted out of office. Too bad no kongresskritter can be impeached for dereliction of constitutional duty.]
PIZAZZO [reviewing her cell-phone-taken snapshot of the new (IN)justice department chief, Mike Pukasy]: Welcome to the group, General Mike! I'm jut adding your photo to our informal archives -- such as they be -- of our little sessions here.
PUKASY: Thanks for inviting me, Dora. Just make sure that you -- uhmmm -- keep that, and any other unofficial photos of me, close-hold. No need to abandon this administration's penchant for excessive secrecy, you know. Besides . . ..
CHEEZEY [interrupting as he chomps into a maple-sugar-glazed donut]: Uh-huh . . . that's the spirit, Mikey ol' pal. When in doubt, close it out! Say, did you see this full-page ad [handing a copy to Pukasy] in the current issue of "The Interrogator"?
PUKASY [quickly glancing at the page and passing it along to Pizazzo]: Not only have I seen it, Dick; I've also known its author for a number of years. He's soon to become general counsel for that little firm in Alabama -- Torture Chamber Systems, Inc. They couldn't have picked a better man for that slot. And here's some more good news: I've just sent TCS a check for $100k. I'm pretty sure that, with this investment, I won't ever have to buy stock in any other outfit; they're gonna out-google Google!
BU$CH: Wait a minute . . . [interrupting himself]: First, this coffee's cold. Would you go get us another pot, Dora? [Pizazzo, hesitating, with a frown, listlessly leaves the room; whereupon Bu$ch resumes his comment in a lowered voice.] Ain't what you've done, Mike, bordering on conflict of interest?
PUKASY: Not at all, Dubya. My ethics experts at Justice have told me that so long as I defer taking any earnings from my stock holdings, I'll be okay. Same as with the case of Dick's shares in Cheezeyburton, for example. They did caution me, though, to forego TCS's offer to serve on their board of directors. So, I've volunteered my wife to serve in that capacity until I can return to the private sector. Cushy, eh?
GRATES: You know, Mike, I think I'll look into buying some TCS stock, too. I already have some shares with a bauxite-mining company in Paraguay, so maybe we can pursue a little symbiosis here. Sure glad the TCS folks don't make prospective king-pin stockholders undergo a waterboarding session before they can buy-in -- heh-heh. [At that moment, the door opens as W-H press secretary Pizazzo wheels in a cart topped with a tray of steaming coffee, more donuts, and a faxed message of congratulations to Pukasy from TCS CEO Otto Planck.]
PIZAZZO [affecting a subservient air as she kicks aside an empty chair along her route to the food table]: Okay, guys, here's some fresh fertilizer for your inquiring minds. [She grabs a chocolate-coated donut and proceeds to her seat.] I trust y'all have refrained from discussing any profundities during my absence.
BU$CH: Oh, just a couple of minor budgetary items, Dora-dear. Nothing to keep any notes on, though.
PIZAZZO: Good; but just in case our pesky, yet-to-be-nabbed mole who's been feeding tidbits of these sessions to the likes of Larry "Witless" Bryant intends to leak any of THIS session, how about filling me in?
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 14/11/2007 09:39:01 (14/11/2007 18:39:01)|
Dear FBI and CIA and To Whom It May Concern:
An internet message, attached below, says that there are red, blue and yellow lists that have to deal with which citizens get rounded up and shot prior to martial law, or after martial law, rounded up and put in concentration camps to be re-educated (and then probably killed), or merely left alone for a while, and then killed or starved.
Do you know of these lists? Can you check for me and let me know which one, if any, my name is on? You see, death is certainly planned for those on the red list, and is likely for those on the other lists. (Red: Dead, Blue: Re-ed, then dead, Yellow: Starved, then dead.) So, I figure, if death is probable in any of those categories, could I request that my name be moved to the red list, although I don't really qualify as any kind of leader?
You see, I am not very interested in the blue list "re-education" unless it involves copious amounts of beer. Does it, do you know? This information would help me in this decision, so let me know. However, I can only imagine that it means I'll have to watch a lot of stupid movies like I did in 6th grade health class, and maybe have electrodes placed on sensitive portions of my anatomy or get my teeth punched out or something. If that is the case, definitely move me to red. Getting rudely awakened at 4 am sounds better and better. I will, however, TRY to qualify as a leader or a "terrorist" or something, so that this program can be carried out with the absolute fairness I know you folks hold to so strongly.
I'm not very interested in being on the yellow list, since starving interests me about as much as drowing in a mud puddle does. Plus, I know too much--conspiracy theory, anyway--and would certainly instigate trouble among other yellow listers, if only to escape certain boredom during the starving and killing phrase of the operation.
So what do you say? I'd appreciate your assistance, as always.
P.S. I'd try to get this message to those foreign forces myself, but I only have a vague idea where these underground bases are, and my carrier pigeons don't have a clue to how to get there from here.
Addendum: From the Net
There are several foreign forces currently holed up in various underground bases. Many of these have been programmed via mind-control tecniques. Those have been given 'lists' containing names of citizens that they will be responsible for rounding up.
Red List - These people are the enemies of the NWO. They are the leaders of patriot groups, outspoken ministers, outspoken talk show hosts, community leaders, and even probably NET leaders. These people will be dragged out of their homes at 4:00 am and will be taken to FEMA detention centers and killed. This will take place approximately 2 weeks before martial law is enforced.
Blue List - these are also enemies of the NWO, but are followers of the Red List folks. These people will be rounded up after martial law is in place, and will be taken to the detention centers and 're-educated'. Various mind-control tecniques will used on them. Most will not survive this. Mr. Springmeier was not specific on exactly who was on the Blue List, but I would guess that people such as you and I are on that list.
Yellow List - these are citizens who know nothing about the NWO and don't want to know. They are considered to be no threat at all and will be instructed as to how to behave and will most likely do whatever they are told. Unfortunately there are too many of these to be effectively controlled, so many will be killed or starved.
August 20, 1996
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 09/12/2007 09:42:27 (09/12/2007 18:42:27)|
LAWYERS CHARGE THE CIA TORTURED THEIR CLIENT IN SECRET PRISONS
by Carol Rosenberg
WASHINGTON — Lawyers for a terrorism suspect from suburban Baltimore who’s imprisoned at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba claim they have evidence that their client “was subjected to a program of state-sanctioned torture” while he was in CIA custody.
The lawyers for Majid Khan are asking a federal court to order the Bush administration to preserve evidence of how their client was treated during his three-plus years in CIA custody, saying they have ample evidence that he was tortured.
Their heavily censored court filing, which was delivered under seal Thursday to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and obtained by The Miami Herald, comes as Congress and the Justice Department have opened preliminary investigations into the CIA’s destruction of tapes of interrogations of two men who were held with Khan in a secret prison camp for “high-value” detainees at Guantanamo.
Defense lawyers Gitanjali Gutierrez and Wells Dixon met with Khan for two weeks in mid-October at Guantanamo, where he’s held in Camp 7, a previously unknown part of the prison that’s reserved for former “ghost detainees”, according to declassified notes of their meetings.
In the notes, the two wrote that they found Khan with a scar on his arm from trying to gnaw through an artery, and that he still suffers psychological trauma. Their brief, which includes two still-secret appendices, was crafted from those interviews and speaks of Khan’s treatment in captivity and that of other prisoners who, it alleges, “were similarly abducted, imprisoned and tortured by U.S. personnel at CIA black sites around the world.”
CIA censors redacted, or blacked out, whom the lawyers allege ran what they call “The CIA Torture Program.” Censors also blacked out two full pages in which the lawyers argue why, “There is no doubt that Khan was subjected to a program of state-sanctioned torture.”
There was no way to test the lawyers’ allegations independently, and the U.S. government denies that it engages in torture. Justice Department spokesman Erik Ablin Saturday said that the government was “reviewing the allegations” and preparing a response to the lawyers’ motion.
No one but his lawyers and U.S. military and intelligence officials has seen Khan, and none of the other former CIA captives who’ve been detained at Guantanamo for more than a year has seen an attorney.
Still, the notes of the two attorneys from the New York Center for Constitutional Rights offer a glimpse inside the prison-within-a-prison at the detention center.
Camp 7 was opened when the alleged high-value detainees arrived at Guantanamo, around Labor Day 2006, to prevent their tales from spreading to the other 300 or so prisoners.
The lawyers’ notes claim that Khan and another alleged al Qaida terrorist, Abu Zubaydeh, had contact with each other. The disclosure that the CIA destroyed tapes of interrogations of Abu Zubaydeh triggered the ongoing investigations.
Khan was born in Pakistan but grew up near Baltimore, where he graduated from a suburban high school, and got political asylum in the United States, where his father still lives. The son was visiting Pakistan in March 2003 when, he claims, CIA officers kidnapped him in Karachi. He then disappeared into a secret interrogation program shielded even from the International Committee of the Red Cross, which tracks prisoners around the globe.
President Bush ordered Khan and 13 other former CIA captives, among them alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, transferred to military custody in September 2006.
In October, granting the lawyers access to Khan, the Pentagon charged that he “reportedly had links to al Qaida operatives and facilitators, some who . . . involved him in a discussion of smuggling explosives into the United States.”
Khan hasn’t been charged with any crime, and his lawyers say in their brief that the alleged CIA torture “will be the central focus of any military commission proceedings involving Khan.” They also allege that while he was in CIA custody, “Khan admitted anything his interrogators demanded of him, regardless of the truth.”
Gutierrez was due back on the isolated naval base in southeast Cuba on Sunday night to meet with her client again and to brief him on the effort to preserve evidence in his case.
The information is being disclosed now because, under lawyer-access rights at Guantanamo, the attorneys had to turn all 500 pages of notes of their conversations with their client over to classification inspectors and only recently have had four pages of a summary cleared for public disclosure.
Rosenberg reports for The Miami Herald.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 10/12/2007 05:13:44 (10/12/2007 14:13:44)|
CIA DIRECTORS REJECTED DESTRUCTION OF TAPES
Saturday, December 8, 2007 1:55 PM
By: Ronald Kessler Article Font Size
CIA Director Michael Hayden will testify before Congress on Tuesday amid Democratic fury over the spy agency's destruction of videotapes that showed terrorism suspects being interrogated using harsh techniques.
When the CIA’s clandestine service asked permission to destroy video tapes showing waterboarding and other coercive interrogation of two terrorists, Directors George Tenet and later Porter J. Goss turned them down, Newsmax has learned.
Despite that, when Goss was running the agency in November 2005, Jose A Rodriguez, Jr., the head of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, ordered the destruction of the tapes showing the interrogation of al Qaeda operatives Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.
“The destruction damages the agency’s credibility with the public, Congress, and judges,” says John L. Martin, who dealt extensively with the CIA on legal issues as chief of the Justice Department’s espionage prosecutions. “Judges will be more skeptical about submissions made by the intelligence community after this.”
Rodriguez was said by CIA sources to be concerned that if the tapes were obtained by Congress or the courts and leaked to the press, they could be used by jihadists as anti-American propaganda and could lead to targeting of the CIA officers depicted administering waterboarding and other coercive techniques.
In a statement to employees, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden said the tapes were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers when the tapes had no intelligence value. By not taking issue with the destruction, Hayden was sending a message that he will not gratuitously second guess CIA officers who risk their lives to protect the country.
The Justice Department meanwhile announced a preliminary investigation of the destruction of the tapes to determine if further investigation is warranted.
Goss was informed of the destruction of the tapes after the fact and was said to be angered by it, as was John Rizzo, the CIA’s counsel. At the same time, some CIA operatives suggest that Rodriguez felt he could get away with ordering the destruction on his own because CIA management was so dysfunctional under Goss. Goss surrounded himself with a tight circle of former Capitol Hill aides who engaged in ego battles with widely admired and successful CIA officers.
One example was Stephen R. Kappes, a former Moscow and Kuwait Station chief who played a pivotal role in secret talks that led Muammar al-Qaddafi of Libya to give up his program to develop weapons of mass destruction. Kappes resigned from the CIA when Patrick Murray, who was chief of staff to Goss, ordered Kappes to fire his deputy, Michael Sulick, after Sulick criticized Murray over the nasty way he had treated another CIA officer. Hayden has since brought Kappes back to the agency, promoting him to deputy director.
Under Tenet, Rodriguez did not head the clandestine service, but other operatives within that service were rebuffed when they asked Tenet for permission to destroy the tapes, sources say. Rodriguez recently retired from the CIA.
When he learned of the destruction of the tapes, Hayden ordered the agency to notify key members of the House and Senate intelligence committees. Back in 2003, John L. Helgerson, the agency’s inspector general, viewed the tapes when conducting an investigation of the interrogations and found nothing troubling about them, according to a CIA source.
However, the destruction of the tapes calls to mind activities carried out by the CIA in the 1960s and 1970, leading some to say then that it was a rogue agency. At the same time, the larger controversy about what the tapes depict spotlights the precarious position the agency is in when it is used as a political football when the CIA and the FBI are in the forefront of protecting the country from terrorist attacks.
Despite a drumbeat of media reports about it, the CIA has used waterboarding as an interrogation tactic on only three terrorists and has not used the technique since 2003. As normally defined, torture is the infliction of severe pain. While waterboarding causes fear because it simulates drowning, it is painless. In fact, in case they are captured and experience it, U.S. special forces are subjected to waterboarding as part of their training.
Since the media began disclosing that the CIA was using waterboarding, the technique has become virtually useless. If terrorists know they will be subjected to fake drowning, they will not respond to it. The CIA does not believe outright torture produces reliable results and has never used it. Scaring prisoners with waterboarding is another matter. The technique was used when the CIA believed a second wave of attacks was imminent.
Besides Abu Zubaydah, Osama bin Laden’s field commander or chief of operations, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the mastermind of the bombing of the USS Cole, the technique was used on Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 plot. In these cases, waterboarding and other and other coercive techniques — like subjecting prisoners to frigid temperatures or forcing them to stand for hours — have worked and have led to a takedown of other key al-Qaeda operatives when they were planning more attacks that could have killed tens of thousands of Americans.
Coercive techniques were first used on Zubaydah when he stopped cooperating.
“We weren’t getting very much from him at all,” Robert Grenier, the former chief of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, told me for my book “The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack.” “And that’s when we began the process of putting together a properly focused interrogation process. It was refined a good deal subsequently, but he was the test.” [Editor’s Note: Get Ronald Kessler’s book. Go here now.]
Before they were employed, the Justice Department reviewed the interrogation procedures and determined that they were legally permissible. As the interrogation of Zubaydah and other detained terrorists progressed, the CIA briefed the chairs, ranking members, and majority and minority staff directors of the House and Senate intelligence committees on the details of the procedures used. Yet now, members of Congress are getting air time by decrying the use of waterboarding.
Contrary to hysterical press reports, fewer than 100 terrorists have been detained in CIA facilities since the program began in the spring of 2002. Fewer than a third of them have been subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.
Congress has twice had the chance to ban waterboarding but has twice declined to do so. In the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Congress only barred “cruel, inhuman or degrading” treatment. Now legislation that would ban waterboarding is being considered.
Aside from alerting al-Qaeda to methods used to interrogate them, the disclosure of secret techniques and so-called secret prisons has impaired cooperation with the CIA by key foreign countries. According to Grenier, even though they were mostly wrong, the stories have had a devastating effect. Perhaps half a dozen countries, most critically important in the war on terror, said they would have to ratchet down cooperation with the CIA on sensitive projects. All did, in fact, scale back such cooperation
Still, agency officials are dismayed at the destruction of the tapes and do not condone it. At the same time, they point out that the controversy over waterboarding and the specter of members of Congress calling for investigations and prosecutions feeds a risk averse atmosphere that existed under the Clinton administration and is starting to creep back into the intelligence community.
In his statement to employees, Hayden said, “I understand that the agency [destroyed the tapes] only after it was determined they were no longer of intelligence value and not relevant to any internal, legislative, or judicial inquiries, including the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui.” He added, “These decisions were made years ago. But it is my responsibility, as director today, to explain to you what was done, and why. What matters here is that it was done in line with the law.”
“No one had a problem with waterboarding when they were briefed on it at the time,” says a former CIA official. “Now people are starting to back away. What happens the next time CIA officers are asked to take actions that may be close to the edge but have been approved by the Justice Department, the White House, and members of Congress and may save may tens of thousands of lives?”
Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 11/12/2007 08:40:42 (11/12/2007 17:40:42)|
ABC FOCUSES ON DETAINEE WHO SUFFERED "TORTURE" BY AIR CONDITIONING
“Torture” by air conditioning. Leave it to ABC’s Peter Jennings to highlight the plight of a Pakistani who survived being detained at the U.S. facility at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
After Jennings on Tuesday night helpfully noted how “human rights organizations have complained the U.S. is violating the prisoners’ rights and acting without regard for international law,” reporter Bob Woodruff narrated a story about the prisoner’s claims of mistreatment, including the “torture” of air conditioning.
Woodruff empathized with how the man, who is now back in Pakistan, was “swept up in the chaos of the war, he was handed over to the U.S. and flown to Cuba, blind-folded and tied.” The Pakistani charged that “once gave a call for prayer, and after that, we were punished...They beat us, they hit us on the head, grabbed us by the neck.”
The man, “who had never seen air conditioning before, thought it was a kind of torture,” Woodruff related before the man complained about how “they pumped cold air from a hole in the ceiling. This was the punishment. The air was very cold.”
Most of the residents of Cuba outside the U.S. naval base dream of such a “punishment.”
Woodruff concluded by noting that the man never got the $2,000 the U.S. promised “in compensation for his ordeal” and worse, “no one...has even apologized.”
Hey, he’s alive and well.
Jennings introduced the piece on the November 19 World News Tonight, as transcribed by MRC analyst Brad Wilmouth: “In Pakistan, one of the first and only prisoners released from the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba has been talking about his experience. For more than a year, the U.S. has kept the prisoners completely isolated from the world. Human rights organizations have complained the U.S. is violating the prisoners’ rights and acting without regard for international law. Tonight, what it was like inside Guantanamo. Here’s ABC’s Bob Woodruff.”
Woodruff began, over video of the man in Pakistan: “In Guantanamo Bay, Mohammed Sageer (spelling a guess) was known simply as 'Prisoner 143.’ But in Pakistan, he had been a lumber cutter with two wives and nine children. He says he had only gone to Afghanistan last year as part of an Islamic teaching group. But swept up in the chaos of the war, he was handed over to the U.S. and flown to Cuba, blind-folded and tied. [over video from a distance of two soldiers carrying a prisoner in chains] Twice a month, he was bound in chains, he said, and questioned by U.S. intelligence about his ties to terrorists.”
Mohammed Sageer, through translator: “They asked me how I went to Afghanistan, where is Osama, are there any al-Qaeda people here or not? They showed me photos and asked me, 'Who are these men? Do you recognize them?’ I said I’d never seen any of them.”
Woodruff: “In the beginning, his jailers were strict. Prisoners got just ten minutes for meals and could not talk to each other or even pray.”
Sageer: “We once gave a call for prayer, and after that, we were punished. This was a difficult time. They beat us, they hit us on the head, grabbed us by the neck. Some people were unconscious, and they were taken to the hospital.”
Woodruff, over video of a prisoner in orange jump suit being pushed on a wheeled gurney by soldiers: “He says those who defied the rules were placed in solitary confinement -- small, air-conditioned cells. Sageer, who had never seen air conditioning before, thought it was a kind of torture.”
Sageer: “There was a small window in the roof and a light, and they pumped cold air from a hole in the ceiling. This was the punishment. The air was very cold.”
Woodruff: “In the final months, he says, his American jailers became friendlier, moving prisoners from cages into proper cells. But for nearly a year, he had been completely cut off from the world. His family thought he was dead. Then, suddenly the Americans let him go.”
Sageer: “The translator was holding a bag. He told me, 'Please take the bag, change your clothes, and be ready to go back to Pakistan.’ I did not believe it. I thought he was joking.”
Woodruff concluded: “Sageer and his family are now heavily in debt. He claims the Americans promised him $2,000 in compensation for his ordeal, but all he has received is $100 from the government of Pakistan. And no one, he says, has even apologized. Bob Woodruff, ABC News.”
Sageer missed the presidency of a President who might have apologized.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 18/12/2007 08:09:12 (18/12/2007 17:09:12)|
250 FORMER IRAQ DETAINEES CLAIM TORTURE IN NEW US LAWSUIT
Tue Dec 18, 2:26 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - More than 250 people once held in Iraqi prisons, including the notorious Abu Ghraib, have filed suit against a US military contractor for their alleged torture, attorneys said Tuesday.
The Center for Constitutional Rights said a lawsuit was filed in US federal court on Monday asking for millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages against CACI International Inc. of Arlington, Virginia.
The complaint, filed in the name 256 former detainees who were released without ever being charged with a crime, alleges that CACI interrogators who were sent to Iraqi prisons directed and engaged in torture between 2003-2004.
The lawsuit charges that the detainees were repeatedly beaten, sodomized, threatened with rape, kept naked in their cells, subjected to electric shock and attacked by unmuzzled dogs, among other humiliations.
The court action also names two CACI employees -- Stephen Stefanowski, knowns as Big Steve, and Daniel Johnson, known as DJ -- accusing them of participating in the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
The two contractors allegedly directed corporal Charles Graner, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for this role in the Abu Ghraib scandal, and sergeant Ivan Frederick, who is serving an eight-year jail term, according to the lawsuit.
"These corporate guys worked in a conspiracy with those military guys to torture people," Susan Burke, the lead attorney in the case, told AFP.
"And now the military have been held accountable, but the company guys and the company have not been," she said.
The complaint is the latest against CACI, which has faced lawsuits since 2004. A previous class-action lawsuit was rejected by a court.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 20/01/2008 04:24:41 (20/01/2008 13:24:41)|
CANADA REMOVES U.S., ISRAEL FROM TORTURE WATCHLIST
SACHANT QUE LES ÉTATS-UNIS CONTRÔLENT TOUTES LES BASES ET LES CAMPS DE CONCENTRATIONS DANS LE MONDE ENTIER ET SACHANT QU'ISRAËL EST LE PAYS QUI EST RECONNU COMME ÉTANT CELUI QUI ENTRAINE LES FORCES MILITAIRES À TRAVERS LE MONDE, NOUS POUVONS CLAIREMENT VOIR QUE LE CANADA MENT EFFRONTEMMENT À TOUTE LA POPULATION PAR SA PRISE DE POSITION. TOUS LES CAMPS DE CONCENTRATION PRATIQUENT LA TORTURE, SANS QUE LE CITOYEN N'AIT AUCUNE CHANCE DE S'EN SORTIR, LES LOIS LUI EMPÊCHANT TOUTE CHANCE D'AVOIR UN PROCÈS JUSTE ET ÉQUITABLE.
LE CANADA PROTÈGE ET SOUTIENT PAR LE FAIT MÊME LA CRIMINALITÉ DE SES GOUVERNEMENTS. PAS SURPRENANT PUISQU'IL FAIT PARTIE DE CETTE VASTE CONSPIRATION PLANÉTAIRE.
By David Ljunggren
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's foreign ministry, responding to pressure from close allies, said on Saturday it would remove the United States and Israel from a watch list of countries where prisoners risk being tortured.
Both nations expressed unhappiness after it emerged they had been listed in a document that formed part of a training course manual on torture awareness given to Canadian diplomats.
Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier said he regretted the embarrassment caused by the public disclosure of the manual, which also classified some U.S. interrogation techniques as torture.
Read more : http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1762987120080119
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 30/01/2008 09:56:46 (30/01/2008 18:56:46)|
MUKASEY OFFERS VIEW ON WATERBOARDING
Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times
Michael B. Mukasey, center, leaving the House chamber on Monday night after the president’s State of the Union address.
By PHILIP SHENON
Published: January 30, 2008
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said Tuesday that the harsh C.I.A. interrogation technique known as waterboarding was not clearly illegal, and suggested that it could be used against terrorism suspects once again if requested by the White House.
Mr. Mukasey’s statement came in a letter delivered Tuesday night to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has scheduled for Wednesday its first oversight hearing for the new attorney general. The conclusions of the letter are likely to be a focus of severe questioning by Senate Democrats who have described waterboarding, which creates the sensation of drowning, as torture.
“If this were an easy question, I would not be reluctant to offer my views,” Mr. Mukasey wrote to Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who heads the committee.
“But with respect, I believe it is not an easy question,” he said. “There are some circumstances where current law would appear clearly to prohibit the use of waterboarding. Other circumstances would present a far closer question.”
The letter did not define any of the circumstances.
Mr. Leahy said in a statement late Tuesday night that the letter “echoes what other administration officials have said about the use of waterboarding” but that it did not “answer the critical questions we have been asking about its legality.” He said that Mr. Mukasey “knows that this will not end the matter” and that he can expect “to be asked serious questions at the hearing tomorrow.”
The Bush administration has confirmed that the Central Intelligence Agency used waterboarding against a small number of Qaeda figures captured after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The administration has said waterboarding was stopped several years ago in the wake of protests over the practice, in which suspects are placed on a flat surface, cloth or cellophane is put over their faces, and water is then poured over them.
The question of whether waterboarding amounts to torture nearly derailed Mr. Mukasey’s nomination for attorney general. At his Senate confirmation hearings in October, he refused to say whether he considered the technique to be torture or to be otherwise illegal. He said he needed to withhold judgment until he had received classified briefings on the subject if confirmed.
Several Democratic senators said then that his refusal to define waterboarding as torture had led them to oppose confirmation. He was confirmed on a vote of 53 to 40, and the 13-vote margin was the narrowest for a nominee to the post in more than 50 years.
Mr. Leahy and the nine other Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee wrote to Mr. Mukasey last week to insist again that he answer the question of whether waterboarding was torture. The attorney general suggested in comments to reporters at a news conference last Friday that he might never feel compelled to answer the question, no matter how often it was asked by lawmakers and the press.
In his letter Tuesday to Mr. Leahy, Mr. Mukasey said that since arriving at the Justice Department in early November, he had “conducted a thorough and careful review of the department’s legal analysis concerning the techniques that are currently authorized for use in the Central Intelligence Agency’s program for interrogating high-level Al Qaeda terrorists.”
He said that only “a limited set of methods is currently authorized for use in that program,” and added: “I have been authorized to disclose publicly that waterboarding is not among those methods. Accordingly, waterboarding is not, and may not, be used in the current program.”
“I understand that you and some other members of the committee may feel that I should go further in my review and answer questions concerning the legality of waterboarding under current law,” he said. “But I do not think it would be responsible for me, as attorney general, to provide an answer.” He added, “I do not believe that it is advisable to address difficult legal questions, about which reasonable minds can and do differ, in the absence of concrete facts and circumstances.”
He suggested that waterboarding might be reintroduced under the “defined process by which any new method is proposed for authorization” in the C.I.A.’s interrogation program.
“That process would begin with the C.I.A. director’s determination that the addition of the technique was required for the program,” he continued. “Then the attorney general would have to determine that the use of the technique is lawful under the particular conditions and circumstances proposed. Finally the president would have to approve of the use of the technique.”
Mr. Mukasey’s letter appeared to be an effort to deflect some of the harsher questions he may be asked on Wednesday, in his first public testimony on Capitol Hill since his confirmation battle last fall.
“I will answer those questions to the best of my ability, within the limits that I have described,” he said. “I recognize that those limits may make my task today more difficult for me personally. My job as attorney general is to do what I believe the law requires and what is best for the country, not what makes my life easier.”
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 06/02/2008 01:54:30 (06/02/2008 10:54:30)|
FROM: WILLIE MARTIN, SUBJECT: THE COMING AMERICAN HOLOCAUST
Summary: An interview with Mr. Sea regarding New World Order plans for the U.S. and its citizens
In the spring of 1997, Senior Editor, Professor Ian Stewart, met with "Mr. Sea" (real name known but withheld) to discuss what he has learned first-hand about the coming persecution at the hands of the New World Order operatives. With a seven-inch thick portfolio filled with photographs, news articles, correspondence, etc., Mr. Sea revealed disturbing information about New World Order efforts to destroy and enslave America. The following are some of Mr. Sea‘s comments. But first, let's take a look at the man who made the comments.
Mr. Sea, a committed Christian, is a former inspector for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Defense, with 31 years of federal service in the military, nine with the Department of Defense, including two years with the Air Staff. He’s a holder of the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart, the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, three awards of the Joint Service Medal, all of the Vietnamese awards, as well as the Joint Meritorious Unit Medal. When he retired a few years ago, he was awarded the Secretary of Defense Civilian Service Medal. He’s been around the world, to 31 countries on four continents, and speaks five languages. Mr. Sea spoke of the coming American Holocaust of the Government’s plans for dealing with the non-New World Orderites. He spoke of the infrastructure that has already been set up to incarcerate and execute Americans, and the locations of the facilities that will be used for these purposes, all with photographs, leaving little to the imagination.
"The infrastructure is set up. There are at least 130 concentration camps — quietly modified facilities which have sprung up and continue to spring up across the country, seemingly devoid of activity, yet requiring strange accoutrements such as barbed wire-topped fencing (with the tops turned inward) and helicopter wind socks. Most have good logistical supportability, with major highways and railroad transport facilities adjacent to the sites.
"These facilities, many in remote areas across our country, are set up to become concentration/detention camps, complete with gas chambers, for resisters and dissidents. Generally speaking, they’re set up for dissenters who will not go along with the New World Order. The ‘resisters’ are gun owners who refuse to give up their weapons; the ‘dissidents’ are Christians, Patriots and Constitutionalists. These camps are set up. I’ve seen many of them.
"On August 6, 1994, I toured the Amtrak Railcar Repair Facility at Beech Grove, Indianapolis, Indiana. There are at least ten maintenance barns at this facility, covering 129 acres, with two separate fences with the tops leaning inward. The windows of several buildings have been bricked up. Hence, you have three levels of security for Amtrak repair barns! There are three helicopter 25-knot aviation wind socks (which aren’t the correct ones to use for chemical spills which require 10-knot wind socks). There are high security NSA-style people turnstiles, and high intensity/security lighting for 24-hour operation. The box car (gas chamber) building fence is marked with special ‘RED/BLUE Zone’ signs [visible in the photo ]. This corresponds to the ‘mission’ of the RED/BLUE Lists which surfaced in June and July of 1996. Under martial law, this will become a death camp. They’re only going to handle category one and two (RED and BLUE) people there. This box car facility will be used for execution.
"One of the barns is large enough to put four box cars into. There are powered vents on the top of the barn to vent the gas out of the building after the box cars have been fumigated. All of the buildings have newly installed six-inch gas pipes and furnaces installed in all ‘railroad barns.’ Since the photo [below] was taken in August 1994, FEMA has allocated $6 million to make the walls and roofs of the buildings ‘airtight’ (see article below). Under martial law, this facility could be immediately used as an SS-style ‘termination’ gas chamber.
"On January 27, 1995, The Indianapolis News ran an article titled, ‘Amtrak Lays off 212 at Beech Grove: 170 Lose Jobs at Maintenance Center Today.’ Why perform $6 million worth of renovations, and then lay off 212 people? Because the people doing the final executions will not be Americans. Thus, the ‘slots’ of the 212 will be filled with non-Americans. They’ll hire foreigners for this ‘cappo’ task. Cappo (‘chief’ in Italian) was the title of the trustee prisoners who actually killed many Jews for the SS butchers at Dachau, and at other Nazi crematoria across Europe. The news article also said, ‘...hopes the yard may be able to solicit work repairing private train cars, and perhaps subway cars from Washington, DC, or other urban areas.’ The repairing of private trains is a dead giveaway to death cars! The article went on to say, ‘Late last year, Congress ordered Amtrak to spend at least $5.9 million patching holes in the roof and fixing masonry on the walls of the giant machine sheds at Beech Grove.’ These buildings have been ‘sealed.’ They’re airtight. The facility is constructed to allow gas to be blown into all the buildings via the newly installed, two-story, not air heating furnaces."
Next, Mr. Sea elaborated on the two categories the RED and BLUE Lists, and what they mean: "The RED List is for pick-up and execution before unobtrusive preparations for martial law are initiated. The BLUE List is also for execution, but at a later date — within six weeks of martial law declaration. There are no ‘re-education’ plans for either category — just execution. When you get picked up on a RED pick-up, they’ll take you from your home at night — probably around 4 a.m. — and put you in a black van, then drive you to a helicopter waiting to fly you to an intermediate point. There, you’ll be loaded onto a big 64-passenger CH-47 Chinook helicopter=97all black, unmarked and illegally operating under the Treaty on Open Skies. Then they’ll fly you to one of 38 cities where you’ll board a 747, 737, or 727. "You may be taken straight to a temporary detention facility. When you’re RED listed, you’ll be taken to a red camp. Then you’ll be executed.
"At some point, martial law will be declared. (Martial law is when the writ of Habeas Corpus — to have a trial by jury — is suspended. Instead, of going to the judge, you go straight to jail for a limited time,) I suspect there will be a major outage, or some other crisis which will be the reason to declare martial law. At this point, the BLUE listed people will be picked up. At that time, the country will be regionalized into ten regions, which are already designated by FEMA. Be advised that it has been proven (in Wyoming and at least one other location) that the black choppers have state-of-the-art radio (RF) frequency wideband jammers, and can jam cell phones and CBs while they’re executing black operations missions (i.e., in your area). This means that your cell phone could be jammed just before and/or during any action against you.
"In June of 1996, an FBI agent got hold of the Region Three BLUE List (from a CIA agent), and found his own name on it, and those of several others he knew in Virginia. The Regional BLUE List stated that the names on the BLUE List would be picked up ‘within six weeks of the actual martial law declaration.’ This parallels the Nazi RED/BLUE List policy almost to the letter. The parallel Nazi plan was published by Heinz Hohne in his 1966 book, The Story of the Nazi SS: The Order of the Death’s Head. (I’ve read this book and sent it to Jack McLamb.)
"People say, ‘It won’t work.’ But it will work if the 300,000 Soviet troops which are ALREADY HERE can get the guns. The name of the game is to blackball the people to get the guns...make the militia look bad, make guns look bad, make everybody give up their guns. Once they get your gun, they’ve got you, UNLESS you’ve got the angel of the Lord at your door. If you’ve got the angel of the Lord out there protecting you, it’s another story.
"The ones doing all of this are operating out of the highest places in the Federal Government. They’re cooperating with ‘spirit guides and mediums’ and using astrology and numerology. The spirit guides are telling them what to do, and the entire thing is being orchestrated at the highest spiritual levels. Every base has been covered. They’ve thought of everything. If you notice, they often do things on the 13th of the month. Mr. Clinton does a lot of things on the 13th.
"Who will be doing the actual picking up? Foreign ‘cops’ (United Nations Internal Security Forces). Over 30 foreign military bases under the United Nations flag are already set up in the US., all with the approval of special appointees in high Federal positions. These bases are already manned with over ONE MILLION troops from Russia, Poland, Germany, Belgium, Turkey, Great Britain, Nicaragua, and Asian countries. Why are they here? Because unlike our own troops —many of which along with the Guard and Reserve of 24 states are being deployed overseas — will have no qualms about firing on U.S. citizens when the time comes. There are more than 2,000 Russian tanks, military trucks and chemical warfare vehicles just outside Gulfport, Mississippi. They began arriving in January of 1994. There are 180 foreign troops at Fort Reilly which was confirmed to me by a Brigadier General. There are 300 who came into the Birmingham, Alabama airport on a big white Russian cargo plane on December 13, 1995. As of 1995, there were 10,000 plus foreign troops at Fort Chafee, Arkansas reportedly making preparations for 20,000 ‘detainees.’ This is going on all over the country. German troops are known to be at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, and Fort Hood, Texas. Chinese troops are known to be at the Long Beach Naval Station in California. There’s not going to be some future event when the invading troops are going to show up. They’re already here! When martial law is implemented, these foreign U.N. troops will be policing our country, carrying out the plans of the New World Order.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 07/02/2008 08:21:36 (07/02/2008 17:21:36)|
USA NAZIS ET BARBARES : LA MAISON BLANCHE AUTORISE LA "SIMULATION" DE NOYADE !!!
PRECISIONS IMPORTANTES EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'HORRIBLE ARTICLE CI-DESSOUS :
La "simulation" de noyade EST UN ACTE DE TORTURE, UN ACTE BARBARE DE PLUS à l'actif de ce DICTATEUR HITLERIEN DE GEORGE W. BUSH !!!
Lorsque l'on dit que cela sera réservé "aux personnes SUSPECTEES de terrorisme", cela ne signifie pas seulement les terroristes réels, bien entendu. Cela inclut les "terroristes domestiques" et les "leaders d'opinion radicaux". Cela inclut des innocents.
Question : que faudra-t-il pour que la "simulation" de noyade se transforme effectivement en noyade effective ? Très peu de choses ! Un "interrogateur" un peu trop zélé (un peu trop criminel, quoi) suffira pour tuer les gens !
SI LES AMERICAINS ACCEPTENT CE GENRE DE DECLARATION ET DE DECISION SANS RIEN FAIRE EN OPPOSITION IMMEDIATE, ALORS LES U.S.A. SONT FOUTUS DE CHEZ FOUTU !
La question effroyable que nous devons nous poser est : QUAND CE GENRE DE BARBARIE VA-T-IL ARRIVER DANS NOS PAYS ???
Car je vous le rappelle : les TRAÎTRES et les ORDURES qui dirigent l'Europe SUIVENT AVEUGLEMENT ET A LA LETTRE CE QUE FONT LES U.S.A. !!! Vic.
Source : http://fr.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080206/twl-usa-torture-droitshomme-lead-36d2…
LA MAISON BLANCHE AUTORISE LA "SIMULATION DE NOYADE" POUR LES INTERROGATOIRES
AFP - Mercredi 6 février, 17h13
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Les Etats-Unis pourront utiliser à l'avenir la simulation de noyade pendant des interrogatoires de personnes soupçonnées de terrorisme, a annoncé mercredi la Maison Blanche, refusant de qualifier cette pratique d'acte de torture.
"Cela dépendra des circonstances", a indiqué le porte-parole Tony Fratto, ajoutant: "si l'on croit qu'une attaque pourrait être imminente, cela pourrait être une circonstance dont on voudra vraiment tenir compte".
"Le président (Bush) écoutera le jugement averti des professionnels du Renseignement et le jugement du ministre de la Justice en termes de conséquences légales de l'emploi d'une technique particulière", a ajouté le porte-parole.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 11/02/2008 02:28:47 (11/02/2008 11:28:47)|
° USA : L'ADMINISTRATION BUSH CONFRONTEE AU TORTUREGATE ?
INTERVENTION DE JURISTES
« Plus d'un millier de juristes américains ont signé une déclaration demandant au Congrès américain d'ouvrir une enquête sur des activités inconstitutionnelles et potentiellement criminelles de l'administration Bush. »
Read the article : http://www.planetenonviolence.org/L-Administration-Bush-Confrontee-au-Tortu…
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 21/02/2008 11:03:09 (21/02/2008 20:03:09)|
BRITAIN REGRETS THAT U.S. "TORTURE FLIGHTS" LANDED ON BRITISH TERRITORY
NE CROYEZ SURTOUT PAS LORSQUE LE PREMIER MINISTRE GORDON BROWN SE DIT DÉSAPPOINTÉ FACE À LA SITUATION DONT IL EST QUESTION DANS L'ARTICLE, PAS PLUS DU FAIT QU'IL SEMBLE IGNORANT DE CE QUI SE PASSAIT. CET HOMME CONTINUE À METTRE EN PLACE LA DICTATURE EN PLUS DE TRAVAILLER À L'ISLAMISATION DU ROYAUME-UNI TOUT AUTANT QUE NE LE FAISAIT SON PRÉDÉCESSEUR TONY BLAIR. CET HOMME PRATIQUE LE CULTE DU SERPENT. NOUS LE VOYONS QUELQUEFOIS DANS UN SIGNE QU'IL FAIT AVEC LA MAIN, SIGNE QU'IL ENVOIE À SES AMIS SATANIQUES.
www.chinaview.cn 2008-02-22 00:26:37
LONDON, Feb. 21 (Xinhua) -- British Foreign Secretary David Miliband admitted on Thursday that two U.S. "torture flights" did land on British territory in 2002, contrary to previous reports.
Miliband told the House of Commons that he was "very sorry indeed" to have to say previous denials made in "good faith" were now having to be corrected.
"Terrorist suspects" on two separate U.S. flights landed at a U.S. base on the British Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia to refuel in 2002, he said, and the United States had only alerted the British government to the incidents last week due to archive errors.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw made statements in 2005, 2006 and 2007 saying there was no evidence that flights had stopped on British territory.
Speaking in Brussels, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he was disappointed and that it was unfortunate that flights had landed on Diego Garcia without the knowledge of the British government.
Miliband said U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has expressed "deep regret" that the British government was misled.
He said Rice shared his concern, adding "we both agree that the mistakes made in these two cases are not acceptable and she shares my deep regret that this information has only just come to light."
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 21/02/2008 11:25:32 (21/02/2008 20:25:32)|
BRITISH AIRPORT USED FOR US RENDITION FLIGHTS
By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Last Updated: 6:01pm GMT 21/02/2008
A British overseas base was used for American "torture" flights the Government has been forced to admit, despite categorical denials of British involvement from both Tony Blair and Jack Straw.
The history of extraordinary rendition flights
Case study: Ex-Guantanamo captive 'who was tortured'
Three Line Whip: Government's dark secret is out
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, was forced to apologise to MPs and Gordon Brown said he shared the "disappointment with what has happened."
David Miliband has said he is 'very sorry indeed' that the Commons was unintentionally mislead
In a major embarrassment for ministers Mr Miliband told the Commons that new information from the American Government had revealed that Diego Garcia, a British air force base in the Indian Ocean, had been used for two rendition flights.
America has used flights interrogate terror suspects – in particular since the attacks on America on 9/11.
One of the flights that has now come to light was stopping off on the way to the American detention centre at Guantanamo Bay.
Mr Miliband said he was "very sorry indeed" to have to correct previous statements made by then Prime Minister Mr Blair and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw that rendition flights had not used British bases.
He said the cases involving Diego Garcia had not come to light before because of an "error" in an earlier US records search.
He said: "The House and the Government will share deep disappointment at this news, and about its late emergence. That disappointment is shared by our US allies.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 23/02/2008 01:57:56 (23/02/2008 10:57:56)|
REPORTS FROM TEXAS COMMISSION ON JAIL STANDARDS 2004 REPORT ON CONDITIONS IN TEXAS JAILS
CHAPLAIN EXPOSES TAYLOR COUNTY JAIL, ABILENE, TEXAS
The invaluable Grits for Breakfast blog posted this shocking letter about the use of brutal physical attacks, pepper spray and other illegal actions against inmates in the Abilene jail.
Note: 2MP has removed the names of inmates for their protection.
Dear Mr. Attorney General:
As a chaplain for Taylor County Detention Ministries, the majority of my service is spent volunteering at our Juvenile Detention Center but I also serve at the Taylor County Jail.
Over a period of approximately three years I have received various complaints about jail personnel from inmates both past and present, their relatives, county employees and medical personnel. While some of these complaints appear to be without merit, some reported incidents ring true; incidents that violate the Texas Administrative Code’s Minimum Jail Standards. I am requesting your office investigate the veracity of these purported violations. Prohibited sanctions allegedly violated under TITLE 37, PART 9, CHAPTER 283 §RULE 283.1, SUBSECTION (4) are as follows:
(B) corporal punishment, (C) administration of disciplinary action by inmates, (D) deprivation of clothing, (F) deprivation of items necessary to maintain an acceptable level of personal hygiene and (H) deprivation of physical recreation or exercise.
§RULE 283.3 may also have been violated according to SUBSECTIONS: (1) lack of access to a grievance board of more than one person, (2) not providing details on what constitutes grounds for initiation of a grievance and (7) not providing a documented appeals process when requested.
The most serious types of complaints I’ve received about jailers (designated by number instead of name) are as follows: JAILER #1 kicking inmate Wesley Freeman while he was restrained on the floor by other jailers, JAILER #1 elbowing an inmate in a specialized restraining chair equipped with straps, JAILER #2
Posted by [sic] on February 19, 2008 at 12:53 a.m.
encouraging an inmate to hang himself, exposing inmates restrained in the chair to the sun for long stretches of time, subjecting an inmate to multiple dog bites, allowing the beating of inmate [Name Removed] (a juvenile certified as an adult) by a known adult adversary, prescrïption drugs stolen by staff, drugs sold to inmates by staff, the taunting of a 100% disabled veteran and former Air Force Captain (who will testify by affidavit) to crawl across the concrete floor for his withheld asthma medication, the pepper spraying of asthmatic inmate [Name Removed] by JAILER #3 for defiantly knocking his bowl off the table, several claims of pepper spray being used for corporal punishment (mostly by JAILER #3) including: the spraying of toilet paper thus making it harder to clean up, putting sprayed inmates in a drunk tank or “rubber room” for long periods of time (up to a full night) without a change of clothing and no water to wash off the debilitating spray (Sheriff Dieken says this is done for a maximum of fifteen minutes), jailers purposefully spraying up into inmates’ nostrils and mouths plus in one case restraining the head and pulling back the eyebrows so that an inmate’s eyelids opened wider to expose his eyeballs to a more direct spray. It has been reported to me that pictures of inmate injuries are missing or not taken at all. Complaints that some inmate grievances not followed up on by staff are common. Sheriff Jack Dieken admits that grievances used to get thrown in the trash and destroyed before taking office but claims he put an end to this practice and ended the beatings he admits occurred prior to 1993.
Posted by [sic] on February 19, 2008 at 12:54 a.m.
[Name Removed], (a juvenile sentenced to twenty years for manslaughter) was reportedly a victim of trumped up or exaggerated internal write-ups that were eventually used against him in the sentencing phase of his trial. The supervisor that reportedly wrote some of them has since been fired. With regard to that case, Assistant District Attorney Harriet Haag is being investigated by The Board of Disciplinary Appeals for violating Rule(s) 3.03 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.
It is interesting to note that all but one inmate I’ve spoken with say they are well fed and none claim to be the target of racial slurs by jailers. Although some “feel” discriminated against, none have provided evidence and all but one state that only a fraction of jailers are committing said violations. If an inmate is simply going to lie, why doesn’t he or she lie about being the victim of racial slurs or food deprivation? The consistent details add credibility to accusations by inmates.
Although Sheriff Jack Dieken has publicly stated that he is open to hearing complaints, my experience with him is less than satisfactory. When I inquired into the civil rights of inmates he told me that “I don’t need you. You’re nothing. You’re nothing. You’re a citizen.” With regard to my inquiries, Sheriff Dieken demanded that I “Leave it alone.” When I responded “I can’t do that, Sir” he then retorted, “Then you’re a sorry Republican. You’re a damn liberal Democrat.” As a direct result, I am no longer allowed to counsel adult inmates face to face or see them at all without special permission.
The above conversation happened the Monday after I requested an investigation into [Name Removed]’s claim of being kicked by a jailer. The Sheriff’s response to me was “[Name Removed] is a piece of crap. He is a little piece of putty.” He is “not worth my time.” He referred to inmate [Name Removed] in similar terms when I brought up his beating at the hands of another inmate.
I can’t be certain which claims are valid but neither can the Sheriff, who reportedly hasn’t even spoken with [Name Removed] or [Name Removed] regarding their claims. Nevertheless, since speaking with the Sheriff it has been made public that one jailer resigned after being confronted about punching an inmate and two others were reprimanded for taking heavy-handed “liberties” with another inmate. The story was published on 8/29/06 in the Abilene Reporter News (www.reporternews.com).
Posted by [sic] on February 19, 2008 at 12:55 a.m.
As a chaplain, I am not in a position to investigate these claims. Although I did contact our Chief of Police, the District Attorney and a Texas Ranger about the matter, no investigation has been initiated that I am aware of. That is why I am asking the Attorney General’s Office to interview related prisoners, county employees and medical personnel. Please investigate these claims and find out how much money is spent on pepper spray. Are these allocated funds in align with the 36 pepper spray incidents that have been documented this year?
I don’t want to give the impression that I don’t appreciate what jailers do; I am very pro-law enforcement. My mother and stepfather both served as police officers and my stepbrother currently serves as a police detective. Like my family, I realize jailers provide a valuable service for relatively low pay. Nevertheless, jailers that systematically violate Minimum Jail Standards cast a dark shadow on the majority who perform their jobs with integrity. Law-breaking jailers are simply criminals with pepper spray and a badge. Nobody should be above the law.
Lance Hunter Voorhees
Chaplain – Taylor County Detention Ministries
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 25/02/2008 02:08:33 (25/02/2008 11:08:33)|
MEDIA -- DOCUMENTARY ON TORTURE WINS OSCAR
February 25, 2008
Last night, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences awarded an Oscar to Taxi To The Darkside for best documentary feature http://www.oscar.com/nominees/ . The film explores the Bush administration's detention polices in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and features the story of an innocent Afghan taxi driver tortured to death http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/04/26/torture_policy/ by U.S. officials at Bagram Air Base. Director Alex Gibney originally agreed to sell the rights of the film to the Discovery Channel because executives convinced him they would "give the film a prominent broadcast. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/08/gibney-taxi-discovery/ " But the cable channel decided to break its contract to air the film prior to the 2008 elections because executives planned to take the company public and were afraid the "film's controversial content might damage Discovery's public offering." Last week, however, HBO announced that it had bought the rights to Taxi and will show the film in September 2008.
--Message edité par maria le 2008-02-25 11:13:12--
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 06/03/2008 09:22:28 (06/03/2008 18:22:28)|
RETIRED MILITARY GENERALS CRITICIZE PRESIDENT BUSH FOR PREPARING TO VETO ANTI-TORTURE BILL
The former Chief Judge of the US Army Court of Criminal Appeals, Brigadier General James Cullen, and Marine Maj. Gen. Fred Haynes discuss their opposition to torture and why they feel the use of torture threatens national security. Last month, they joined forty other retired US military leaders to urge the Senate to approve the torture ban.
Read more : http://www.democracynow.org/2008/3/6/retired_generals_criticize_president
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 18/03/2008 00:50:18 (18/03/2008 09:50:18)|
NEW YORKER: ABU GHRAIB ABUSES WERE 'DE FACTO US POLICY'
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Photographer wanted to expose 'what the military was allowing to happen'
Some of the most iconic images of the Iraq war came not from photojournalists on the front lines, but US soldiers carrying point-and-shoot digital cameras. In its latest issue, the New Yorker profiles the woman who snapped many of the photos depicting abuse at Abu Ghraib prison that the same magazine revealed nearly four years ago.
Like many of the soldiers in charge of the detained Iraqis at Abu Ghraib, Sabrina Harman had little experience running a prison. As Philip Gourevitch and Errol Morris report, she and others in her Army Reserve unit didn't stick out at the prison, "where almost nothing was run according to military doctrine."
The low-ranking reservist soldiers who took and appeared in the infamous images were singled out for opprobrium and punishment; they were represented, in government reports, in the press, and before courts-martial, as rogues who acted out of depravity. Yet the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was de facto United States policy. The authorization of torture and the decriminalization of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of captives in wartime have been among the defining legacies of the current Administration; and the rules of interrogation that produced the abuses documented on the M.I. [Military Intelligence] block in the fall of 2003 were the direct expression of the hostility toward international law and military doctrine that was found in the White House, the Vice-President's office, and at the highest levels of the Justice and Defense Departments.
The article, which appears in the March 24 issue of the New Yorker, has not been posted online, but the magazine has posted additional photos and videos to augment the report.
Gourevitch and Morris trace Harman's evolving reactions to the horrors she witnesses -- "ricocheting from childish mockery to casual swagger to sympathy to cruelty to titillation to self-justification to self-doubt to outrage to identification to despair" -- through interviews and excerpts she sent home from the prison. In one October 2003 letter to Kelly, the woman Harman called her wife, the young MP writes what could now be seen as a grim foreshadow to the war in which American soldiers are still fighting and dying.
"These people will be our future terrorist," she writes one night after witnessing interrogators poking one detainees genitals with a stick and handcuffing another to his top bunk. "Kelly, its (sic) awful and you know how fucked I am in the head. Both sides of me think its (sic) wrong. I thought I could handle anything. I was wrong."
Harman and other soldiers told of taking prisoners' blankets and leaving them naked in bare cells while temperatures dipped near freezing. The New Yorker writers relay witness accounts of bones being found inside Abu Ghraib incinerators and prisoners being submerged in ice-filled trash cans.
She also told of women and children being held at the prison, according to the magazine.
The youngest prisoner on the tier was just ten years old -- "a little kid," she said. "He could have fith through the bars, he was so little." Like a number of the other kids and of the woman there, he was being held as a pawn in the military's effort to caputre or break his father. ... She didn't like seeing children in prison "for no reason, just because of who your father was," but she didn't dwell on that.
The photos, Harman said, were intended to "expose what was being allowed ... what the military was allowing to happen to other people."
One of the most iconic images from Abu Ghraib is actually among the most innocuous, Harman tells the magazine. It shows a hooded prisoner wearing a prison blanket with arms outstretched and attached to wires. The wires were not live, so there was no danger of electrocution for the prisoner, known as Gilligan to the soldiers guarding him.
Subsequent investigations revealed that Gilligan was not who the Army's Criminal Investigative Division thought he was -- he was simply an innocent cab driver. His interrogators appeared to have little regard for how he was treated before that information came to light, though, Gourevitch and Morris report.
Staff Sergeant Chip Frederick later told Army investigators that the asked the C.I.D. man -- whom he identified as Agent Romero -- about Gilligan, and that Romero said, "I don't give a fuck what you do to him, just don't kill them."
Another of Harman's photos shows her smiling and giving a thumbs-up gesture next to the body of a dead Iraqi man, a suspected insurgent named Manadel al-Jamadi, wrapped in ice. Harman was told the man died of a heart attack, but a subsequent autopsy revealed he died of "blunt force injuries" and "compromised respiration," presumably at the hands of a CIA interrogator.
After the photos were made public, Harman and several of her fellow low-ranking reservists faced courts martial and were punished with reductions in rank and bad-conduct discharges.
Only one person ranked above staff-sergeant faced charges, but was acquitted of criminal wrongdoing. No one has ever been charged with abuses that were not photographed, and charges against Harman related to her al-Jamadi photographs were thrown out (the CIA interrogator never faced charges, either).
Harman became increasingly unnerved by what she witnessed, and said she would simply try to forget whatever had happened the day before with each new morning. She was asked how the other MPs could participate in the abuses without similar reservations.
"They're more patriotic," is all she could say.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 01/04/2008 10:15:26 (01/04/2008 19:15:26)|
MEMO: LAWS DIDN'T APPLY TO INTERROGATORS JUSTICE DEPT. OFFICIAL IN 2003 SAID PRESIDENT'S WARTIME AUTHORITY TRUMPED MANY STATUTES
John C. Yoo, now a law professor in Berkeley, Calif., defended his memo, saying, "Our legal advice to the President, in fact, was near boilerplate." (By Karen Ballard -- The Los Angeles Times)
The Justice Department sent a legal memorandum to the Pentagon in 2003 asserting that federal laws prohibiting assault, maiming and other crimes did not apply to military interrogators who questioned al-Qaeda captives because the president's ultimate authority as commander in chief overrode such statutes.
Read more : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR200804010…
Pages : Prec. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Suiv.
Aller à : Les favorisPAROLE DU SEIGNEUR POUR CES TEMPS DE LA FIN/WORD OF GOD IN THE END TIMESSITES RECOMMANDÉSCONFÉRENCE ET/OU MOBILISATION + NASAPRENDRE NOTE QUE :ORGANISATION DES NATIONS-UNIES/UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATIONCONSEIL MONDIAL DES ÉGLISES/WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHESRÉSUMÉ DE LA SITUATION MONDIALE PAR VICLA MARQUE DE LA BÊTE/THE MARK OF THE BEASTTERREUR SUR LA TERRE/TERROR ON EARTHLES CAMPS DE CONCENTRATION/CONCENTRATION CAMPSFASCISTE ENVIRONNEMENTAL/ENVIRONMENTAL FASCISTNOUVELLES LOIS ANTITERRORISTES/NEW ANTITERRORIST LAWSPROJET FUTUR POUR LES ENFANTS/FUTUR PROJECTS FOR KIDSDEPOPULATION DE LA TERRE/DEPOPULATION OF THE EARTHCANADAISRAËL et le MOYEN-ORIENTTRAITÉ DE L'AMERIQUE DU NORD/NORTH AMERICAN UNION (CANADA-USA-MEXICO)SECTION DE GAÉTANVIDÉOS/VIDEOS
| ||Ajouter une réponse rapide|
|Ajouter une réponse rapide|
Ce forum pour votre site ?
AceBoard Forum Gratuit v 5.3
Download Premium Web Templates! - blog gratuit
Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 29 020
|Posté le: Sam 10 Sep - 17:29 (2011) Sujet du message: LA TORTURE/LA MORT - LES LISTES ROUGES ET BLEUES - P.3
Notification par email | Prévenir les modérateursPages : Prec. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Suiv.
|Auteur :||Sujet: LA TORTURE/LA MORT - ET LES LISTES ROUGES ET BLEUES || Bas|
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 06/04/2008 06:19:16 (06/04/2008 15:19:16)|
LE PENTAGONE PUBLIE LA NOTE AUTORISANT LA TORTURE
DANS CET ARTICLE, NOUS POUVONS VOIR TOUS LES POUVOIRS QUE POSSÈDE LE DICTATEUR BUSH. CELA VA MÊME JUSQU'À SUPPLANTER LE DROIT INTERNATIONAL SUR LES DROITS DE L'HOMME, CE QUI NOUS MONTRE BIEN TOUTE LA MAGOUILLE SE CACHANT DERRIÈRE CE VASTE PLAN DE PAIX MONDIAL.
LE PRÉSIDENT BUSH, NOUS LE SAVONS MET EN PLACE LES LOIS ANTI-TERRORISTES DES NATIONS UNIES. CES LOIS ANNULENT DONC LES AUTRES QUI SONT PROMULGÉES PAR CETTE MÊME INSTANCE MONDIALE.
DE PLUS, DANS L'ARTICLE, LA TORTURE NE SERAIT QU'APPLICABLE QU'AUX MEMBRES PRÉSUMÉS D'AL-QAÏDA OU DES MILICES TALIBANES. CECI EST COMPLÈTEMENT FAUX. LES LOIS SUR LE TERRORISME DOMESTIQUE PERMETTENT MAINTENANT AU PRÉSIDENT DES ÉTATS-UNIS ET À TOUS LES GOUVERNEMENTS DE LA TERRE DE POUVOIR TORTURER TOUT OPPOSANT À L'ORDRE ÉTABLI.
NOUS SERIONS TOUS SURPRIS DE SAVOIR LE NOMBRE DE PERSONNES QUI SONT AUJOURD'HUI TORTURÉS ET TUÉS DE PAR SES MAINS CRIMINELLES QUI NOUS GOUVERNENT.
POURTANT, LES NAÏFS CROIRONT QU'ILS N'ONT PAS À S'EN FAIRE PUISQUE CELA NE LES TOUCHENT PAS DIRECTEMENT. CECI PERMET DONC AU PRÉSIDENT ET AUX AUTRES GOUVERNANTS DE CONTINUER À AVANCER SANS ÊTRE INQUIÉTÉ ET SANS TROP DE RÉSISTANCE DE LA PART DU PEUPLE QUI BOIVENT SES PAROLES COMME ÉTANTS VRAIES.
LES NOMBREUSES MANIFESTATIONS DANS LE MONDE INTERPELLENT DE PLUS EN PLUS DE PERSONNES, MAIS LA GRANDE MAJORITÉ NE CONNAISSENT PAS TOUTE CETTE GRANDE CONSPIRATION MONDIALE.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 06/05/2008 23:31:20 (07/05/2008 08:31:20)|
JUDGE RULES FOR TASER IN CAUSE-OF-DEATH DECISIONS
by Robert Anglen - May. 2, 2008 07:28 PM
The Arizona Republic
Taser International has fired a warning shot at medical examiners across the country.
The Scottsdale-based stun gun manufacturer increasingly is targeting state and county medical examiners with lawsuits and lobbying efforts to reverse and prevent medical rulings that Tasers contributed to someone's death.
That effort on Friday helped lead an Ohio judge's order to remove Taser's name from three Summit County Medical Examiner autopsies that had ruled the stun gun contributed to three men's deaths.
"We will hold people accountable and responsible for untrue statements," Taser spokesman Steve Tuttle said earlier this week. "If that includes medical examiners, it includes medical examiners."Many medical examiners, who are charged with determining the official causes of death, view the Scottsdale-based company's efforts as disturbing, the spokesman for the National Association of Medical Examiners says.
"It is dangerously close to intimidation," says Jeff Jentzen, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners. "At this point, we adamantly reject the fact that people can be sued for medical opinions that they make."
In the Ohio case, the judge said the county offered no medical, scientific or electrical evidence to justify finding the stun gun was a factor in the deaths of two men in 2005 and another in 2006. Taser and the City of Akron sued the medical examiner, saying examiners in the case lacked the proper training to evaluate Tasers.
Chief Medical Examiner Lisa Kohler said that her examiners rightly concluded Taser contributed to the deaths and said county lawyers will appeal the judge's ruling.
"I would not be going forward with this if I did not believe in the rulings," she said.
The judge's order could have an immediate impact on criminal cases against five Summit County sheriff's deputies who were charged in the 2006 "homicide" of a jail inmate. Instead of homicide, the judge ordered the cause of death changed to "undetermined."
Laying a foundation
Before Friday's verdict, legal experts said Taser's victory could lay the foundation for other cases against dozens of medical examiners who have ruled that shocks from the 50,000-volt stun gun can be fatal.
Medical examiners say they're concerned that Taser's aggressive moves could have a chilling effect on doctors, preventing them from blaming Tasers for deaths even when evidence exists.
Taser still faces lawsuits from family members of victims who claim the stun gun is deadly and the company has not done proper medical research. They allege police officers are using the weapon as a compliance tool against people who do not pose significant threats.
But the company has won an impressive number of legal victories and said it has only paid out settlements in a few cases involving police officer injuries. To date, the company says more than 60 cases have been dismissed.
Taser stun guns are a fixture among police. It is used by more than 12,000 police agencies across the country, and by every major law enforcement agency in the Valley. Many police agencies credit the gun with preventing deaths and injuries to officers and suspects.
Taser maintains they are safe
Taser maintains that its guns have not caused a death or serious injury. Officials say company-funded and independent medical studies show the stun guns are safe.
More than two dozen medical examiners across the country have found the stun gun at least partly responsible in the deaths of suspects.
Since 1999, more than 300 people have died in North America following police Taser shocks. The vast majority of those deaths have not been linked to the stun gun. But medical examiners have cited the gun directly or could not rule it out as a factor in nearly 10 percent of the cases, an The Arizona Republic investigation found.
Medical examiners, who typically work for the county or state, are supposed to provide independent scientific analysis about the cause of someone's death. Their rulings are recognized by courts and the police as the official cause of death.
Taser officials have repeatedly said that medical examiners who rule against the stun gun are not qualified to judge whether a Taser was a factor in someone's death. In court disputes, it often presents opposing testimony from company representatives, doctors and medical examiners paid by the firm.
"The qualifications of a medical examiner depend on their professional and educational background as well as their level of understanding of Taser technology and the underlying effects of electricity upon the human body," Tuttle said.
The company's tactics worry Jentzen, a former medical examiner and current director of autopsy and forensics at the University of Michigan.
"I am concerned any time there is a person who is an advocate who may have a conflict of interest," he says.
Jentzen says there are few cases where companies have taken the position that coroners can't be trusted to evaluate their product's involvement in someone's death, and none so aggressively as Taser.
Taser targets rulings
In addition to Ohio, Taser sued a coroner in Indiana who had ruled that Taser caused the death of a man in 2004.
Several coroners have also reported being challenged by Taser, says Jentzen. Among them was a Cook County, Ill., medical examiner who ruled Taser shocks contributed to the death of a 54-year-old man in 2005. Taser dismissed the autopsy report as not credible and said the medical examiner was unqualified. The company demanded a judicial review.
Taser also has asked coroners to reverse opinions. An Anderson, S.C., deputy coroner said Taser representatives showed up in his office on the same day that he ruled Taser shocks contributed to a man's death in 2004.
Charlie Boseman said Taser wanted him to remove any reference to the stun gun from his report. He refused.
Coroners told to bone up
Taser officials have provided coroners reams of medical research in support of the stun gun following a death.
Tuttle says it is up to medical examiners to do the proper research, read the papers and perform tests before making a ruling on a death involving a Taser.The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported in 2007 that a county medical examiner based half of his testimony at a coroner's inquest on information supplied by Taser. The medical examiner did not disclose to a jury that he met with Taser officials and reviewed the company's literature before testifying that the stun gun's role in a death was debatable.
In Summit County, Kohler said she has received volumes of medical studies and literature from Taser, all suggesting that the rulings in her cases are wrong.
In Maricopa County, at least 10 people have died following police Taser strikes since 2002. In a 2004 case, the medical examiner's office ruled that Taser shocks contributed to a Mesa man's death. Autopsy reports were unavailable for review this week by The Republic.
Neither Chief Medical Examiner Mark Fischione nor Taser would discuss what, if any, involvement the company had with medical examiners performing autopsies in the cases.
Fischione did not respond to repeated interview requests.
Taser for years touted autopsy reports as proof of the stun gun's safety. Company officials told police departments and shareholders that no medical examiner had cited the stun gun in an autopsy report. But The Republic's investigation found that 27 medical examiners concluded that the gun caused, contributed to or could not be ruled out in deaths.
'Excited delirium' blamed in Taser-related deaths
Taser advocates an alternative cause-of-death scenario called excited delirium. The condition, which is not recognized as a diagnosis in official medical manuals, is used to describe deaths of suspects who become so agitated by drugs, psychosis or poor health that their bodies shut down during struggles with police.
Excited delirium has been cited in police custody-death cases for decades. It is now being blamed more and more by medical examiners for deaths that occur following a police Taser strike, including at least one in Maricopa County in recent years.
Taser has funded excited delirium studies and has been involved in promoting its research. The company maintains that excited delirium is a valid syndrome, and some doctors say it will gain acceptance as more research is conducted.
Mark Schlosberg, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California who has worked on several Taser cases, argued that excited delirium has become a convenient way to explain away deaths that occur at the hands of police.
"There are plenty of medical examiners who are very skeptical of excited delirium," he added. "But that is not what Taser is promoting . . . They attribute almost all of the deaths following a Taser strike to excited delirium."
Reach the reporter at firstname.lastname@example.org or (602) 444-8694.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 20/05/2008 09:25:32 (20/05/2008 18:25:32)|
W. HOUSE IGNORED FBI CONCERNS ON PRISONER ABUSE
Tue May 20, 2008 7:02 PM BST
By Randall Mikkelsen
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top Bush administration security officials ignored FBI concerns over abusive treatment of terrorism suspects, which one agent called "borderline torture," a four-year Justice Department probe found.
The FBI, alarmed by interrogation techniques such as the use of snarling dogs, sexual provocation and forced nudity, clashed with the Defense Department and CIA over their use, said the 370-page report, released on Tuesday by the Justice Department's inspector general.
Read more : http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?&storyid=2008-05-20T19…
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 18/06/2008 20:08:23 (19/06/2008 05:08:23)|
ÉTATS-UNIS: TORTURE 101
(Source: Radio-Canada) Une commission sénatoriale se penche sur l'origine des « méthodes d'interrogatoires dures » utilisées à Guantanamo et dans la prison d'Abou Ghraib et approuvées par l'administration Bush.
Aux États-Unis, un sénateur démocrate révèle, lors d'une audition au Congrès américain, que des techniques d'interrogatoire « dures » étaient enseignées aux soldats américains, et approuvées par l'administration Bush. Ces techniques pouvaient être utilisées dans des prisons comme Guantanamo, à Cuba, ou encore Abou Ghraib, en Irak.
La commission s'est penchée sur un programme militaire qui formait des soldats de l'armée de terre à résister aux interrogatoires, pour qu'ils ne révèlent pas d'informations importantes à l'ennemi.
Nommée « Survie, esquive, résistance et évasion » (SERE), cette formation portait sur la résistance à la privation sensorielle et de sommeil, à des positions inconfortables, à la simulation de noyade (waterboarding), que de nombreuses organisations de défense des droits de la personne reconnaissent comme une forme de torture, et aux gifles.
On a utilisé ces méthodes de résistance pour développer des méthodes d'interrogatoire plus efficaces, pour justement déjouer les méthodes de résistance.
Le secrétaire à la Défense, Donald Rumsfeld, a approuvé plusieurs de ces techniques, dont les « positions de stress », malgré les vives objections, un mois plus tôt, des avocats des services armés.
La commission a aussi publié des notes de service remontant à 2002 sur le programme d'interrogatoires durs à Guantanamo. Dans l'une d'elles, le lieutenant-colonel Diane Beaver, principal avocat militaire de Guantanamo, révèle que la Défense imposait de dissimuler les prisonniers « traités durement » au Comité international de la Croix-Rouge (CICR), responsable du respect des conventions de Genève sur le traitement des prisonniers.
Mme Beaver confirme aussi que l'armée utilisait des techniques auparavant interdites, comme la privation de sommeil, et que les personnes menant les interrogatoires devaient « limiter les opérations les plus dures quand le CICR était là ».
Un avocat de la CIA, présent au moment de l'approbation des techniques d'interrogation, en 2002, a expliqué que le fait de savoir si les interrogatoires durs équivalent à de la torture était « une question de perception ».
Des traces permanentes
Tandis qu'on apprend que les autorités américaines avaient approuvé certaines formes de torture, un rapport des Médecins pour les droits de la personne (Physicians for Human Rights) révèle que d'anciens détenus de prisons militaires américaines en Irak et à Guantanamo souffrent de stress post-traumatique, de séquelles physiques persistantes, et conservent des cicatrices de leur détention.
Ali Shallal al-Qaisi, ancien détenu de la prison d'Abou Ghraib, à Bagdad, a expliqué à l'Associated Press, mercredi, que ses gardiens américains l'avaient sodomisé et forcé à rester nu pendant plusieurs semaines.
« Il y avait des chiens qui me reniflaient et m'aboyaient dessus. Il y avait des gardiennes qui me donnaient des coups de pieds entre les jambes », a-t-il raconté.
Un autre ancien prisonnier raconte qu'il a été soumis à des chocs électriques trois fois et sodomisé avec un bâton. Ses pouces sont couverts de cicatrices liées à l'électricité, selon le rapport.
Un troisième ancien prisonnier affirme qu'il a été humilié en étant contraint de porter des sous-vêtements féminins et qu'il a dû parader nu devant des gardiennes. L'examen psychologique a montré qu'il avait souffert de stress post-traumatique et qu'il avait des problèmes sexuels liés à ces humiliations, selon le rapport.
Comme si cela ne suffisait pas, l'organisme de défense des droits de la personne ajoute que des médecins militaires ont autorisé ces mauvais traitements, refusé des soins médicaux aux détenus ou même fourni aux interrogateurs des informations médicales confidentielles sur les détenus, afin qu'elles soient exploitées.
http://nouvelles.sympatico.msn.ca/EtatsUnis Torture 101/Monde/ContentPostin…
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 24/06/2008 01:08:32 (24/06/2008 10:08:32)|
INSIDE A 9/11 MASTERMIND'S INTERROGATION
A sketch of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, standing, during his arraignment this month.
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: June 22, 2008
Editors' Note Appended
WASHINGTON — In a makeshift prison in the north of Poland, Al Qaeda’s engineer of mass murder faced off against his Central Intelligence Agency interrogator. It was 18 months after the 9/11 attacks, and the invasion of Iraq was giving Muslim extremists new motives for havoc. If anyone knew about the next plot, it was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
The interrogator, Deuce Martinez, a soft-spoken analyst who spoke no Arabic, had turned down a C.I.A. offer to be trained in waterboarding. He chose to leave the infliction of pain and panic to others, the gung-ho paramilitary types whom the more cerebral interrogators called “knuckledraggers.”
Mr. Martinez came in after the rough stuff, the ultimate good cop with the classic skills: an unimposing presence, inexhaustible patience and a willingness to listen to the gripes and musings of a pitiless killer in rambling, imperfect English. He achieved a rapport with Mr. Mohammed that astonished his fellow C.I.A. officers.
A canny opponent, Mr. Mohammed mixed disinformation and braggadocio with details of plots, past and planned. Eventually, he grew loquacious. “They’d have long talks about religion,” comparing notes on Islam and Mr. Martinez’s Catholicism, one C.I.A. officer recalled. And, the officer added, there was one other detail no one could have predicted: “He wrote poems to Deuce’s wife.”
Mr. Martinez, who by then had interrogated at least three other high-level prisoners, would bring Mr. Mohammed snacks, usually dates. He would listen to Mr. Mohammed’s despair over the likelihood that he would never see his children again and to his catalog of complaints about his accommodations.
Read more : http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/washington/22ksm.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxnnlx=1214330587-RcXdrGS+/f8+hZO5wGgvmQ
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 27/06/2008 02:40:07 (27/06/2008 11:40:07)|
ADDINTON, YOO OFFER LITTLE IN HOUSE TORTURE HEARING
June 27, 2008
On Capitol Hill, a House subcommittee heard the testimony of Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff David Addington and former Justice Department attorney John Yoo. Addington and Yoo are said to have been instrumental in developing the administration’s torture policy. We play highlights of the hearing and get analysis with attorney Scott Horton.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Lawyers Guild are calling on the U.S. government to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate the military and CIA’s use of torture.
The calls were made yesterday on the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.
Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill a House subcommittee heard the testimony of Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff David Addington and former Justice Department attorney John Yoo. Addington and Yoo are said to have been instrumental in developing the administration’s torture policy.
To talk more about the torture hearings Scott Horton joins us in the Firehouse studio. He is New York attorney specializing in international law and human rights. He is also a legal affairs contributor to Harper’s magazine, where he writes the blog No Comment. Scott Horton served as chair of the Committee on International Law at the New York City Bar Association.
Scott Horton, New York attorney specializing in international law and human rights. He is also a legal affairs contributor to Harper’s magazine, where he writes the blog No Comment. He served as chair of the Committee on International Law at the New York City Bar Association.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 10/07/2008 21:58:48 (11/07/2008 06:58:48)|
SEX CRIMES IN THE WHITE HOUSE
By Naomi Wolf, Huffington Post. Posted July 7, 2008.
How Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay basically turned into an organized sex-crime ring in which the trafficked sex slaves were US-held prisoners.
Sex crime has a telltale signature, even when those directing the outrages are some of the most powerful men and women in the United States. How extraordinary, then, to learn that one of the perpetrators of these crimes, Condoleezza Rice, has just led the debate in a special session of the United Nations Security Council on the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war.
I had a sense of deja vu when I saw the photos that emerged in 2004 from Abu Ghraib prison. Even as the Bush administration was spinning the notion that the torture of prisoners was the work of "a few bad apples" low in the military hierarchy, I knew that we were seeing evidence of a systemic policy set at the top. It's not that I am a genius. It's simply that, having worked at a rape crisis center and been trained in the basics of sex crime, I have learned that all sex predators go about things in certain recognizable ways.
We now know that the torture of prisoners was the result of a policy set in the White House by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Rice -- who actually chaired the torture meetings. The Pentagon has also acknowledged that it had authorized sexualized abuse of detainees as part of interrogation practices to be performed by female operatives. And documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union have Rumsfeld, in his own words, checking in on the sexualized humiliation of prisoners.
The sexualization of torture from the top basically turned Abu Ghraib and Guantnamo Bay into an organized sex-crime ring in which the trafficked sex slaves were US-held prisoners. Looking at the classic S and M nature of some of this torture, it is hard not to speculate that someone setting policy was aroused by all of this. And Phillipe Sands' impeccably documented Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values, now proves that sex crime was authorized and, at least one source reports, eroticized: Diane Beaver, the Staff Judge Advocate at Guantanamo who signed off on many torture techniques, told Sands about brainstorming sessions that included the use of sexual tension, which was "culturally taboo, disrespectful, humiliating and potentially unexpected."
"These brainstorming meetings at Guantanamo produced animated discussion," writes Sands. "Who has the glassy eyes?" Beaver asked herself as she surveyed the men around the room, thirty or more of them. She was invariably the only woman in the room, keeping control of the boys. The younger men would get excited, agitated, even: "You could almost see their dicks getting hard as they got new ideas" [reported Beaver]. A wan smile crossed Beaver's face: "And I said to myself, you know what, I don't have a dick to get hard, I can stay detached." [Sands, p 63]
The nonsexual torture that was committed ranged from beatings and suffocation, electrodes attached to sensitive areas, and forced sleep deprivation, to prisoners being hung by the wrists from the ceiling and placed in solitary confinement until psychosis was induced. These abuses violate both US and international law. Three former military attorneys, recognizing this blunt truth, refused to participate in the "military tribunals" -- rather, "show trials" -- aimed at condemning men whose confessions were elicited through torture.
Though we can now debate what the penalty for waterboarding should be, America as a nation, maintaining an odd silence, still cannot seem to discuss the sex crimes involved.
Why? It's not as if the sex crimes that US leaders either authorized or tolerated are not staring Americans in the face: the images of male prisoners with their heads hooded with women's underwear; the documented reports of female US soldiers deployed to smear menstrual blood on the faces of male prisoners, and of military interrogators or contractors forcing prisoners to simulate sex with each other, to penetrate themselves with objects, or to submit to being penetrated by objects. Indeed, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 was written deliberately with loopholes that gave immunity to perpetrators of many kinds of sexual humiliation and abuse.
There is also the testimony by female soldiers such as Lynndie England about compelling male prisoners to masturbate, as well as an FBI memo objecting to a policy of "highly aggressive interrogation techniques." The memo cites a female interrogator rubbing lotion on a shackled detainee and whispering in his ear -- during Ramadan when sexual contact with a strange woman would be most offensive -- then suddenly bending back his thumbs until he grimaced in pain, and violently grabbing his genitals. Sexual abuse in US-operated prisons got worse and worse over time, ultimately including, according to doctors who examined detainees, anal sodomy.
All this may sound bizarre if you are a normal person, but it is standard operating procedure for sex offenders. Those who work in the field know that once sex abusers control a powerless victim, they will invariably push the boundaries with ever more extreme behavior. Abusers start by undressing their victims, but once that line has been breached, you are likely to hear from the victim about oral and anal penetration, greater and greater pain and fear being inflicted, and more and more carelessness about exposing the crimes as the perpetrator's inhibitions fall away.
The perpetrator is also likely to engage in ever-escalating rationalizations, often arguing that the offenses serve a greater good. Finally, the victim is blamed for the abuse: in the case of the detainees, if they would only "behave," and confess, they wouldn't bring all this on themselves.
Silence, and even collusion, is also typical of sex crimes within a family. Americans are behaving like a dysfunctional family by shielding sex criminals in their midst through silence.
Just as sex criminals -- and the leaders who directed the use of rape and sexual abuse as a military strategy -- were tried and sentenced after the wars in Bosnia and Sierra Leone, so Americans must hold accountable those who committed, or authorized, sex crimes in US-operated prisons. Throughout the world, this perverse and graphic criminality has added fuel to anxiety about US cultural and military power. These acts need to be called by their true names -- war crimes and sex crimes -- and people in America need to demand justice for the perpetrators and their victims. As in a family, only when people start to speak out and tell the truth about rape and sexual assault can the healing begin.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 14/07/2008 22:02:36 (15/07/2008 07:02:36)|
U.S. TERRORISM WATCH LIST TOPS 1 MILLION
14 Jul 2008
A U.S. watch list of terrorism suspects has passed 1 million records, corresponding to about 400,000 people, and a leading civil rights group said on Monday the number was far too high to be effective. The Bush regime disagreed and called the list one of the most effective tools implemented after the September 11 hijacked plane attacks -- when a federal "no-fly" list contained just 16 people considered threats to aviation.
PROSECUTOR FLAGGED BY US TERROR WATCH LIST
14 Jul 2008
The Justice Department's former top criminal prosecutor says the government's terror watch list likely has caused thousands of innocent Americans to be questioned, searched or otherwise hassled. Former Assistant Attorney General Jim Robinson would know: he's one of them. Robinson joined another mistaken-identity American and the American Civil Liberties Union on Monday to urge fixing the list that's supposed to identify suspected terrorists.
''SUSPICIOUS CHARACTERS' ARE TRAPPED IN THE KAFKAESQUE CLUTCHES OFF THIS LIST, WITH LITTLE HOPE OF ESCAPE.' TERRORIST WATCH LIST HITS ONE MILLION NAMES
ACLU launches online watch list complaint form --A September 2007 report by the inspector general of the Justice Department reported that the list was growing by 20,000 names per month. 14 Jul 2008 The nation's terrorist watch list has hit one million names, according to a tally maintained by the American Civil Liberties Union based upon the government's own reported numbers for the size of the list. "Members of Congress, nuns, war heroes and other 'suspicious characters,' with names like Robert Johnson and Gary Smith, have become trapped in the Kafkaesque clutches of this list, with little hope of escape," said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "Congress needs to fix it, the Terrorist Screening Center needs to fix it, or the next president needs to fix it, but it has to be done soon."
CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 14/07/2008 22:07:04 (15/07/2008 07:07:04)|
TORTURE: MPs CALL FOR INQUIRY INTO MI5 ROLE
New allegations that abuse of Britons was outsourced to Pakistani agencies
Ian Cobain The Guardian, Tuesday July 15, 2008 Article history
The London headquarters of MI5. Photograph: Frank Baron
MPs are calling for an investigation into allegations that British intelligence has "outsourced" the torture of British citizens to Pakistani security agencies after hearing accounts of people being abducted and subjected to mistreatment and, in some cases, released without charge.
John McDonnell, the Labour member for Hayes and Harlington, and Andrew Tyrie, Conservative member for Chichester, say the allegations should be examined by the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), the Westminster body that oversees the Security Service, MI5, and the Intelligence Service, MI6.
In a statement to the Guardian, released via the Home Office, the Security Service insisted it did "not participate in, solicit, encourage or condone the use of torture".
However, details of three new cases have raised concerns among MPs.
McDonnell says he wants to know whether British officials colluded in the abuse of one of his constituents.
The man, a medical student, said he was abducted at gunpoint in August 2005 and held for two months at the offices of Pakistan's Intelligence Bureau opposite the British Deputy High Commission in Karachi. The student, who has not spoken out before, has described how he was whipped, beaten, deprived of sleep, threatened with execution and witnessed other inmates being tortured.
He was questioned about the suicide attacks on London's transport network in July of that year, and says that after being tortured by Pakistani agents he was questioned by British intelligence officers. He was released to his father, who says he received a personal apology from the director of the Intelligence Bureau.
The student returned to his London teaching hospital, qualified last year, and is now working in a hospital in the south-east of England. He remains terrified of both Pakistani and British intelligence agencies, however, and has asked not to be identified. A second Briton, Tariq Mahmood, 35, a taxi driver from Sparkhill, Birmingham, has said he was abducted in Rawalpindi in October 2003 and released without charge about five months later.
He is thought to have been held in a prison run by a different agency, Inter-Service Intelligence, where a number of other Britons have also been held and allegedly tortured before being flown to the UK to stand trial. Mahmood's family say he was tortured, and that MI5 officers and American intelligence officers had a hand in his mistreatment. They have declined to issue any detailed allegation, however, apparently fearing for the safety of relatives in Pakistan.
A third Briton, Tahir Shah, 41, an author from London, was held for 16 days in 2005. He says he was interrogated about the July 7 bombings in what he describes as "a fully-equipped torture chamber", with mangles, whips and electrical equipment.
He says he was hooded and shackled for long periods and deprived of sleep. He does not allege that British officials were involved, but believes it is unlikely they would not have been informed. He was eventually bundled aboard a scheduled flight to Heathrow, where his passport was returned by an unnamed official whom he believes to have been from MI5.
Allegations of collusion in torture could be examined by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, established eight years ago with a remit to investigate complaints against MI5 and MI6. Another possibility is that the ISC could look into the claims.
McDonnell said of his constituent: "I believe that there is now sufficient evidence from this and other cases to demonstrate that British officials outsourced the torture of British nationals to a Pakistani intelligence agency.
"This warrants the fullest investigation by the ISC, which is best placed initially to undertake such an inquiry. I would expect the government to cooperate fully with such an investigation and eventually for the prime minister to make a statement to parliament on how this practice has been allowed to develop and what action is to be taken."
Tyrie, chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition, added: "Any torture of British nationals by Pakistani authorities would be utterly unacceptable. If credible allegations implicating British officials in such mistreatment have been made then they require investigation. The ISC appears to be the most suitable body to examine these issues."
Asked about the allegations, MI5 asked the Home Office to issue a statement which said: "The government unreservedly condemns the use of torture as a matter of fundamental principle and works hard with its international partners to eradicate this abhorrent practice worldwide.
"The Security and Intelligence Agencies do not participate in, solicit, encourage or condone the use of torture or inhumane or degrading treatment. For reasons both ethical and legal, their policy is not to carry out any action which they know would result in torture or inhumane or degrading treatment.
"The ISC gave the Security Service a clean bill of health in its 2005 report on torture. When Security Service personnel had come across instances when poor treatment of detainees was suspected, the report commended that MI5 officers notified the detaining authorities immediately and this was followed up with an official complaint from London.
"All Security Service staff have an awareness of the Human Rights Act 1998, and are fully committed to complying with the requirements of the law when working in the UK and overseas." Earlier this year representatives of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch told another Commons body, the Foreign Affairs Committee, they believed British intelligence officers were colluding in torture.
Tom Porteous, London director of Human Rights Watch, told MPs: "It is pretty clear the US and the UK are relying rather heavily on the well-known abusive Pakistani intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, in the counter-terrorism operations. It is one of the most brutal intelligence agencies in the world." He added that British interrogations of people being held by this agency "seem to amount to complicity and collusion in the mistreatment".
In April the Guardian reported that four other British men, who had been detained in Pakistan during British-led counter-terrorism operations and held illegally for several months without access to a lawyer or court, had each alleged that British officials colluded in their torture.
Under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 it is an offence for British officials to instigate or consent to the inflicting of "severe pain or suffering" on any person, anywhere in the world, or even to acquiesce in such treatment. Any such offence could be punished by life imprisonment.
One of the four, Salahuddin Amin, 33, a university graduate from Luton, later told the Old Bailey that he was interviewed by two MI5 officers several times in 10 months, in between being whipped, beaten with sticks, suspended from his wrists and threatened with an electric drill. MI5 was permitted to give its response to the allegations in camera, with the media and the public excluded.
Allegations of collusion were raised at Amin's appeal against conviction for terrorism offences last month, which was also heard largely in camera. They are to be raised again later this year at the trial of a British man whose lawyers said he had three fingernails extracted while a prisoner of a Pakistani intelligence agency. They say their client was then questioned by British intelligence officers.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 14/07/2008 22:13:06 (15/07/2008 07:13:06)|
RAPE THREATS, BEATINGS AND RACIST CHANTS: 15 ITALIANS JAILED FOR ABUSE OF G8 GENOA PROTESTERS. SENTENCES UP TO FIVE YEARS FOR MISTREATMENT IN 2001
· Verdict likely to embarrass Berlusconi government
John Hooper in Rome The Guardian, Tuesday July 15, 2008 Article historyFifteen Italian police officers and doctors were last night sentenced to jail terms of up to five years after being found guilty of abusing protesters detained during riots at the 2001 G8 summit in Genoa.
Thirty other defendants were cleared of charges ranging from assault to the denial of basic human rights. The judges issued their verdicts after 11 hours of closed-doors deliberations.
The sentences totalled less than a third of what had been demanded by the prosecution. But they will nevertheless be embarrassing for Silvio Berlusconi and his rightwing allies, in office in Italy both then and now.
The court heard former detainees including Britons testify that they were insulted, beaten and sprayed with asphyxiating gas. Some were threatened with rape.
Detainees were made to join in chants in praise of Italy's late fascist dictator, Benito Mussolini. Another chant, lauding Chile's Augusto Pinochet, ended: "Death to the Jews."
Between 100,000 and 200,000 demonstrators converged on Genoa seven years ago to take part in anti-globalisation protests. Most were peaceable, but some were not, and the situation deteriorated as the police employed tactics that many witnesses described as heavy-handed.
The violence peaked with the death of a 23-year-old Italian demonstrator, shot dead by a conscrïpt Carabiniere. More than 250 of those arrested were taken to a holding camp that had been created at Bolzaneto, six miles from Genoa, where the abuses took place.
The heaviest sentence, five years, was given to the camp commander, Antonio Biagio Gugliotta. Twelve other police officers, eight men and four women, received jail terms of five to 28 months.
The chief of medical services at Bolzaneto, Giacomo Toccafondi, was given one year and two months in jail; he was accused of insulting detainees and failing to inform authorities after they were sprayed with asphyxiating gas in cells.
The detainees at Bolzaneto included about 40 who were arrested in a raid on a school being used as a dormitory. A judge ruled that there was no evidence to show any of those demonstrators had been involved in the violence in Genoa.
One, a Briton, Richard Moth, later told the Guardian that, despite injuries sustained in the raid that had him "screaming with pain", he was made to stand for hours spread-eagled against a wall.
The Bolzaneto trial was one of three arising from the Genoa G8 summit. In December 2007, 24 demonstrators were found guilty of damage to property and looting. They were given sentences ranging from five months to 11 years. In the third, ongoing trial, 28 defendants, including some of Italy's most senior police officers, face charges related to the raid on the school, which left 62 injured, three in comas.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 14/07/2008 22:15:31 (15/07/2008 07:15:31)|
DETAINEE'S LAWYERS MAKE CLAIM ON SLEEP DEPRIVATION
By WILLIAM GLABERSON
Published: July 15, 2008
GUANTÁNAMO BAY, Cuba — A week before what could be the first American war crimes trial since World War II, defense lawyers claimed on Monday that an accused detainee might have been subjected to a program of systematic sleep deprivation that they said would constitute torture.
It was the latest in a series of recent accusations about the use of sleep disruption in the past at the detention camp here. Some critics say the assertions undermine a perception fostered by officials that the most aggressive interrogation techniques were used only occasionally at Guantánamo.
The lawyers for the detainee facing trial, Salim Hamdan, said that on Saturday prosecutors for the first time gave them information indicating Mr. Hamdan “entered Operation Sandman” on June 11, 2003, and remained in the program for 50 days.
Operation Sandman has been described as an interrogation plan devised with military psychiatrists for systematically interrupting a detainee’s sleep. “Sleep deprivation of that nature for 50 days would constitute torture,” said one of Mr. Hamdan’s lawyers, Joseph M. McMillan.
A Pentagon spokesman, Cmdr. Jeffrey D. Gordon, did not respond directly to the accusations but said it was military policy “to treat detainees humanely.”
“We typically do not respond to each and every allegation of abuse made by past and present detainees,” Commander Gordon added.
Jameel Jaffer, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who co-wrote a book on the treatment of detainees, said several recent accounts of systematic sleep deprivation were a challenge to what he described as a strategy by detention officials “to respond to allegations of abuse at Guantánamo by contending that the abuse was aberrational and perpetrated by rogue interrogators.”
Mr. Hamdan, a former driver for Osama bin Laden, faces charges of conspiracy and providing material support for terrorism.
The disclosure came as hearings began here Monday in preparation for Mr. Hamdan’s war crimes trial, now scheduled to open on July 21. On Thursday in Washington, lawyers for Mr. Hamdan are to ask a federal district judge to stop the trial with the claim that the military commission system violates the Constitution.
But as the military judge here, Capt. Keith J. Allred of the Navy, pressed on with hearings this week, the defense lawyers said information about what appeared to be the use of the sleep deprivation program was an unexplained entry in some 600 pages of detention records provided by prosecutors after a court order.
Mr. Hamdan’s lawyers have said previously that he was beaten when he was first in custody in Afghanistan in 2001 and that he was subsequently subjected to sexual humiliation and severe isolation at Guantánamo, where he has been held since 2002.
In another detainee’s case, a military lawyer, Maj. David J. R. Frakt, wrote that documents showed that his client, a teenager at the time, was moved from cell to cell 112 times during a 14 day-period in 2004 to keep him in a state of sleepless disorientation.
In accounts dealing with other detainees, officials have written that sleep deprivation was used to soften up detainees before interrogations. A May report by the Justice Department inspector general said American military interrogators appeared to have collaborated with visiting Chinese officials at Guantánamo Bay to disrupt the sleep of Chinese Uighur detainees, waking them every 15 minutes the night before their interviews by the Chinese.
Mr. Hamdan’s military lawyer, Lt. Cmdr. Brian L. Mizer, said the detention camp records also included a somewhat mysterious entry by military personnel, a reference that “Alfred Hitchcock” visited Mr. Hamdan and other detainees on several occasions. Hitchcock, the director known for suspense films, died in 1980. Commander Mizer suggested that the entry appeared to be an ominous alias at Guantánamo.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 16/07/2008 05:35:56 (16/07/2008 14:35:56)|
FMR. CHIEF GUANTANAMO PROSECUTOR SAYS MILITARY COMMISSIONS “NOT JUSTICE”
As the first military tribunal conducted by the United States in more than half a century is scheduled to take place next week in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, we speak with Air Force Colonel Morris Davis, the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo. He resigned his position late last year in protest over what he said was political interference. We speak with Col. Davis about his decision to step down, torture at Guantanamo, and more. “If you’re going to wrap this under the banner of military justice, then it needs to be a fair trial,” Col. Davis said. “What’s taking place now, I would call neither military nor justice.”
Col. Morris Davis, Air Force colonel and the former chief prosecutor in the Pentagon’s Office of Military Commissions. He resigned late last year. He now heads the Air Force Judiciary and is planning to retire.
AMY GOODMAN: The first military tribunal conducted by the United States in more than half a century is scheduled to take place next week in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Salim Hamdan, who was once Osama bin Laden’s driver, was captured in Afghanistan in November 2001. The Bush administration has been attempting to bring him to trial through a special military commission ever since.
A federal judge is holding a hearing Thursday to decide whether to delay Hamdan’s trial and allow lawyers to continue challenging the legality of the commission system. A ruling in favor of Hamdan could bring the military commissions to a halt. The judge is also expected to take into account a new legal brief signed by hundreds of European legislators that supports Hamdan’s case and says his trial by military commission would cause “incalculable harm to the fabric” of international law.
The five-member commissions are made up of military officers and presided over by a military judge. During the proceedings prosecutors are allowed to submit evidence obtained through coercion. Hamdan’s lawyers have argued he was beaten and abused at Guantanamo and subjected to a program of systematic sleep deprivation that they said constitutes torture.
One of the most prominent figures to argue on behalf of Hamdan’s case was Air Force Colonel Morris Davis, the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo. He resigned his position late last year in protest over what he said was political interference. In April, Colonel Davis testified as a witness for Hamdan and offered a harsh critique of the military commission system.
I spoke to Colonel Morris Davis yesterday, and I began by asking why he decided to resign as chief prosecutor at Guantanamo.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: I resigned last October. It was a combination of factors, but kind of, I guess, the final straw that broke the camel’s back was when Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England signed a memo on October the 4th that put me under the command of then-DOD General Counsel Jim Haynes. Mr. Haynes—as you probably know, he testified recently before a congressional hearing—was one of the architects of the interrogation policy, what many people consider to be torture. My policy as chief prosecutor had been that we would not offer any evidence obtained by waterboarding, specifically, or any other interrogation techniques that were unduly coercive. And then, when Mr. Haynes became above me in the chain of command, and his view on what constitutes torture and mine were significantly different, I felt I couldn’t ensure full, fair and open trials, and I resigned—asked to resign.
AMY GOODMAN: What constitutes torture, Colonel Davis?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, that’s a tough—you know, there are a variety of different definitions, and if you look at the definition, it seems fairly simple. But when you try to apply it to specific facts, it gets a little bit harder.
And actually, in my role as chief prosecutor, I really wasn’t concerned about what constitutes torture. Defining torture really focuses on holding accountable the person that’s administering the technique. As the chief prosecutor, I was interested in prosecuting the person making the statement. So, for me, it was really a question of whether the information the person provided was reliable and trustworthy and suitable for use in an American court of justice. So, whether it constituted torture or not, in my mind, was really irrelevant for purposes of what I was doing. It was a question of reliability, not trying to assign accountability to the person performing the technique.
AMY GOODMAN: Colonel Davis, I wanted to ask you about the August 2005 meeting with the Pentagon general counsel who was put above you now, Jim Haynes, the man who is now overseeing the tribunal process for the Pentagon.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, let—if I could just interrupt. Mr. Haynes resigned a few months ago. He’s now an attorney for Chevron and is no longer with the Department of Defense. I believe that is a step in the right direction, but there are a few more steps that are necessary.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, when he said to the nation, “We can’t have acquittals. We’ve got to have convictions.”
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Right. Yeah, that was on October the 2nd of 2005. It was when I came to Washington for what I would describe as a hiring interview. During that, Mr. Haynes brought up that these trials, the trial of the al-Qaeda detainees, would be the Nuremberg of our time. And I pointed out to him that, you know, at Nuremberg, not everyone was convicted; there were some acquittals. And certainly, as a prosecutor, you never go into court aiming for an acquittal, but I said, in my view, if that did happen, that, at a minimum, it would tend to validate the process, that these were fair trials.
And he kind of rocked back in his chair, and his eyes got big, and it appeared to me that it was a thought he had never contemplated, and that was when he said, you know, “Wait a minute, we can’t have acquittals. We’ve been holding these guys for years. How are we going to explain that? We can’t have acquittals. We’ve got to have convictions.”
AMY GOODMAN: How about all these guys who have been held? I think more than 700 have been held at Guantanamo. You’re now down to under 300. You’re talking about hundreds upon hundreds of men—some were boys when they came to Guantanamo—who were never charged and then simply—after being held for what, one, two, three, four, in the case of the Al Jazeera reporter Sami al-Haj, more than five years, held ultimately more than six years by the US—just released?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, again, my part as the chief prosecutor was focused on about seventy-five to eighty of the detainees that we intended to prosecute.
I think one of the many confusing factors in this whole situation has been, you know, the nation has an inherent right, that goes back to the Treaty of Westphalia, to detain enemy combatants, to keep them off the battlefield from causing harm today and tomorrow. Prosecuting folks for violating the law of war is not really focused on today and tomorrow; it’s holding people accountable for what they did yesterday.
So, out of the group of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, there were about seventy-five or eighty that we felt we had reliable evidence to prove they had violated the law of war in the past and should be held accountable, which is separate and apart from the other detainees who were being held to keep them off the battlefield, which really, you know, was not part of the group that I was tasked with, so I can’t really speak to the other detainees.
AMY GOODMAN: Colonel Morris Davis, you’ve talked about David Hicks, saying it was politicians who forced you to press charges against the Australian. Explain his case and what happened to him.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, David Hicks, you know, as you recall, I think a number of folks repeatedly referred to the detainees as “the worst of the worst.” The only military commission case that has been completed was a guilty plea in the case of David Hicks, the Australian, who received a nine-month sentence. So the worst of the worst got, in essence, a misdemeanor punishment and is now a free man in Australia.
I know some folks who said, well, there’s no—you know, what’s the proof that this was political pressure? If you look—Jim Haynes, as I mentioned, was the DOD general counsel. He had been nominated by President Bush for a seat on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, and his nomination was held up after the torture memo and the torture policy came to light. Mr. Haynes pretty much had a hands-off policy the first year I was in the job. But on January—I believe it was January 9, 2007, was the day that President Bush withdrew Mr. Haynes’ nomination for the seat on the federal bench, and that was the day, for the first time ever, Mr. Haynes called me up on a specific case and asked, “How quickly can you charge David Hicks?”
If you look at it at that point in time, the only thing that was in place was the Military Commissions Act. No one had been appointed as the convening authority. There was no Manual for Military Commissions, which is the thick book that lays out the elements of the offenses. So the pieces were not in place to charge anyone, yet I’m getting a call from the general counsel saying, “How quickly can you charge David Hicks?” So, maybe that was just coincidence, but one thing I found in dealing with Mr. Haynes and with the military commissions is things rarely happened by coincidence.
AMY GOODMAN: Elaborate, please.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, as I said, you know, I get a call from him asking how quickly I can charge David Hicks, when there’s only one piece of the puzzle in place. That was the statute. My job as chief prosecutor was—you know, when I swear charges, I forward them to the convening authority for review before the charges are referred to trial. Well, at that point in time, there was no convening authority, so there was no one for me to send charges to, because no one had been appointed to that position. The Manual for Military Commissions, to charge someone, there are elements of the offense that the prosecution has to prove, and those are laid out in the Manual for Military Commissions. That document had not been published on January 9, 2007, so I had no elements of proof to look at to determine what to charge David Hicks with. Yet I’m getting a call from the general counsel saying, “How quickly can you charge him?”
We eventually charged him on February 2nd, along with Omar Khadr and Salim Hamdan. But again, if you look at the timing of it, Susan Crawford, who is the convening authority, wasn’t appointed until, I believe, February the 7th. So, here we are charging people five days before there’s a convening authority to refer charges to, which I think to a reasonable person just doesn’t make much sense.
Also, the regulation for trial by military commissions, which is kind of the deep-in-the-weeds details on how the commissions are conducted, wasn’t published until late April 2007, which was after the David Hicks trial was completed. So we didn’t even have the regulation written at the time we prosecuted David Hicks.
AMY GOODMAN: Colonel Davis, can you talk about your decision, after your resignation, to return to Guantanamo last April to argue on behalf of Salim Hamdan?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Yeah, and I hope it’s clear. I mean, I’ve seen it reported a number of times that I testified on behalf of Salim Hamdan. You know, I’ve seen the evidence against Mr. Hamdan, and I have little doubt in my mind that he’s—as I think is well known, he was captured with two surface-to-air missiles in the back of his car, and the only thing flying in Afghanistan at that time were geese and us. So I have little doubt about his guilt. And so, I don’t believe I’m testifying for Salim Hamdan, but what I am testifying for is that Mr. Hamdan and all of the detainees that will face military commissions are entitled to a fair trial. And at this point in time, I have significant doubt that they will get a fair trial, and that was why I was there to testify.
I mean, I think that—you know, as the ruling turned out in the Hamdan case, the military judge entered a ruling that the things I said, the allegations I raised, were true, and he ordered Brigadier General Tom Hartmann, who’s the legal adviser to the convening authority, to be disqualified from the Hamdan case, because of him exerting unlawful command influence on me and the prosecutors. So I think that’s what we’ve got to get rid of. If we want to have a trial and call it military justice, then it’s got to be a fair trial.
AMY GOODMAN: Air Force Colonel Morris Davis. He was the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo, resigned late last year. He now heads the Air Force Judiciary. We’ll be back with him in a minute.
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our conversation with Colonel Morris Davis, the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo Bay. I asked him about a newly released government document that suggests officials at Guantanamo tortured Salim Hamdan by depriving him of sleep for fifty days.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: I am not familiar. I think I read the same article you were just referring to that talked about the sleep deprivation. I don’t recollect ever seeing that before. And I guess it’s similar—I testified last in the Jawad case, which you may have read about, where the defense alleged that he was subjected to what they called a “frequent flyer program,” where for a period of weeks he was moved from cell to cell on average about once every two hours and fifty minutes around the clock. And again, I wasn’t aware of that, either.
So it appears that there are some things that are documented that the government has access to that are just now coming to light. My view is, you’ve got to know pretty much everything there is about the case before you swear charges and take it into court. In the middle of trial is not the time to be learning what the facts are, and that appears what may be happening in this case.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think sleep deprivation is torture?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: I think it can be. I mean, again, you know, defining torture is fairly easy until you try to apply it to specific facts. And I think you really have to look at the specific facts and the impact it had on the individual. But I think it’s possible for sleep deprivation to rise to that level.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask about the call for you to testify before Congress and, at the time, Jim Haynes saying that you should not testify. What was his response when you were first ordered to?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, I never heard it from him. I—the folks over on Capitol Hill from Senator Feinstein’s office that had asked me to testify called me a couple of days before I was to appear and said the Secretary of Defense office had notified them that I was ordered not to appear and to testify, which again, I think, you know, if you’ve read the news accounts, you know, the Department of Defense has repeatedly denied things that I’ve said, despite a military judge now finding as fact that the allegations I raised were true.
And I’ve repeatedly offered, from the time I resigned in October through December, when I was invited to testify at Senator Feinstein’s hearing, through my testimony here recently at Guantanamo Bay, I’ve said repeatedly if Jim Haynes or General Hartmann or Ms. Crawford or anyone else has any disagreement about my version of the facts, I’ll be more than happy to take a polygraph to verify what I’m saying, if they’ll take one to verify their version of the facts. And so far, no one has ever taken me up on that offer. So I—you know, my commitment has been to tell the truth, to try to do what I can to ensure that the trials are fair. And it appears there have been a number of efforts to keep me from having an opportunity to tell the truth.
AMY GOODMAN: What other efforts?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Which is—which again is, you know, if you’ve read what the Secretary of Defense has said lately in the firing of the Air Force chief of staff and the Air Force secretary, he said military officers have to have the courage to speak blunt truth and that the services need to be a little less thin-skinned and accept criticism and find fault and be willing to address it when it comes to their attention. And I think that’s what I’ve tried to do in this case, is to tell the blunt truth, that if you’re going to wrap this under the banner of military justice, then it needs to be a fair trial. And what’s taking place now, I would call neither military nor justice, and that needs to be fixed.
AMY GOODMAN: Colonel Davis, did you have any interactions with or were you pressured by the Vice President’s office, by Vice President Cheney, by his chief of staff David Addington?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: No, I never had any contact with the Vice President or any member of his staff.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask you about the June 12th Supreme Court decision that said these Guantanamo prisoners have to have their day in a civilian court, the five-to-four ruling, marking the third time in four years the Supreme Court ruled against the Bush administration concerning the rights of Guantanamo prisoners. President Bush was in Italy. He said he opposed the decision. Your response, Colonel Davis?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, I think it’s—it was a monumental decision. Again, if you go back and look at the chronology, when the Boumediene case first got to the Supreme Court, if you recall, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. It was a couple of months later that they reconsidered, which—I think that’s the only time in my lifetime that the Supreme Court, on their own, has reconsidered and agreed to hear a case it previously refused to hear.
And I think what you have to look at is what took place in the interim, and that was when Lieutenant Colonel Abraham came forward, who was a member of some of the CSRTs that met at Guantanamo Bay, and he described that, you know, in some cases the evidence was flimsy; in other cases, when the outcome wasn’t what was desired, they just kept doing—they would have a redo until they got the right result. And I think that caused—and again, I certainly have no personal knowledge, but if you just look at the facts, it appears that the Supreme Court, when they denied the case early on, they were willing to give deference to the executive branch, and it was only after these new allegations came up that suggested that maybe this process wasn’t as robust as it had been billed that they reconsidered. So my take on their decision is that it shows a lack of trust in the executive branch to ensure that the folks detained are getting a meaningful review on whether they’re being properly detained.
My personal opinion is, I think the decision is wrong. I don’t believe the detainees—that foreign terrorists, whose only connection to the Constitution is a sincere desire to destroy it, have constitutional rights. So I disagree with the rationale. But if the result is that it causes Congress and others to focus on the issue and come up with a rational result, then I can live with the rationale, if it gets the right result.
AMY GOODMAN: Jane Mayer’s book came out this week, The Dark Side. And among her revelations is that the Bush administration revealed warnings from the CIA six years ago that up to a third of the Guantanamo prisoners may have been imprisoned by mistake. In 2002, a CIA analyst concluded that many of the prisoners were essentially bystanders who had been swept up in dragnets or turned over to the US military by bounty hunters. What is your response, Colonel Davis?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: My personal knowledge extends to the seventy-five or eighty that we intended to prosecute, and those were cases where our investigators had combed through the evidence and we had a belief that we had reliable evidence to prove their guilt. So I never really dealt in depth with the other detainees that were outside that group. I mean, I think certainly there had been some cases—the Uighurs are probably a prime example—that there was no evidence they had any hostile intent towards the United States. So what percentages, you know, were truly innocent? I don’t know. I can tell you, though, the seventy-five or eighty we intended to prosecute, I personally reviewed the evidence, and I think we have ample justification to detain them and to prosecute them.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think Guantanamo should be closed?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, that’s a tough question. I—personally, I—you know, years ago, I used to be a bail bondsman, so I’ve seen a lot of jails here in the United States, and I think there are American citizens that are incarcerated right now, that, if they could see the conditions at Guantanamo Bay, would be a little upset with their conditions. The prison facilities at Guantanamo Bay are based on existing US facilities, and I think it’s grossly misportrayed in the media. You know, to this day, Camp X-Ray, which was open for about a little over three months at the very start, when there are stories about Guantanamo Bay, you still see pictures of Camp X-Ray, even though it’s been closed for five years now.
I think the facility is a safe, secure, comfortable environment, where the detainees are being—I think their medical care, I can tell you, is much better than the medical care I receive. If they have a stomach ache, they’re going to see somebody today; if I do, it might take a week or two for me to get an appointment. So I think the conditions—there is nothing wrong with the conditions at Guantanamo Bay.
I think the bigger problem, though, is it’s become such a black eye for the country and there’s such a stigma attached to it that I don’t know that there is anything you can do to rehabilitate that image. So, perhaps it – again, that’s a policy decision, but even though—you know, as I said, I think it’s a safe, clean, humane facility. The stigma may necessitate shutting it down.
AMY GOODMAN: When you say it’s safe, I guess the question is “safe for whom?” The idea that—I mean, the CIA is—all their research on torture, on what’s the most effective form of breaking down a personality, that it’s actually not ultimately, you know, physically torturing, beating up a person, but isolating them. And you add to that not knowing what will happen to you, being held for more than five years without charge, the number of attempted suicides, and then some of the real suicides.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Right. Well, I think, again, though, if you compare the conditions there with the conditions that our own citizens are incarcerated in here in the United States, I know if I was given the choice, I would likely pick Guantanamo Bay. Is it ideal? No, it’s not, but I think it is a grossly misportrayed environment. I think most of the bad things you hear about are things that took place years in the past, at least in my involvement, which began in late 2005 and extended up through—I guess, last month I was down there. I have never observed anything during that period that caused me concern. As I’ve said, I’ve seen a lot of jails and a lot of prisons, and Guantanamo Bay is grossly misportrayed.
AMY GOODMAN: It’s interesting that you should say look at how it compares to prisons in this country. It might more be a comment on prisons in this country.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, essentially, you know, when I go out and talk to college students, I show a slide of a cell, and I ask them, “What’s inhumane about this cell?” And sometimes they’ll say, well, it’s kind of small, and it’s got a little bitty window, and, you know, it just doesn’t seem that nice. Then I put up another picture of another cell and ask, “OK, what’s wrong with this cell?” And they usually point out it was identical to the first one. And I put them up side by side and show them: the first cell is where Congressman Bill Janklow served his sentence, and the second one is where Omar Khadr is currently sitting today, and those two cells are identical.
AMY GOODMAN: In May of 2006, the UN Committee on Torture noted that indefinite detention constitutes, per se, a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture, so you don’t see that when you show the cell.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: I don’t see that, you know, and—you know, prior to the Treaty of Westphalia, if you were captured during armed conflict, you generally were either executed or enslaved. Since then, for the last several hundred years, we’ve—it’s been a recognized principle of international law that you can detain the enemy for the duration of hostilities, which by definition is indefinite detention. So, no, I don’t see anything wrong with detaining the enemy during a period of armed conflict.
AMY GOODMAN: Except the CIA is saying that perhaps up to a third have been held mistakenly, not even enemy combatants, as Bush has defined it.
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Right. And that, I’ll agree with. I mean, I—I guess I drank the Kool-Aid on that one, as well, believing that the CSRT process and the administrative review boards were a robust process where the individuals did get, you know, a significant look at whether they were being properly detained. And I think that’s what the Supreme Court has done in Boumediene, is say there’s some doubt about the validity of that process and that these individuals are entitled to some meaningful review. But I think if a person gets meaningful review and they’re determined to be an enemy combatant and we’re engaged in armed conflict, that we have the right to detain them and keep them off the battlefield.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think they got meaningful review at Guantanamo?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, it certainly appears that that’s doubtful in many cases. And again, I think that’s what the Boumediene decision reflects, is some real doubt about the meaningfulness of the review they got, which is regrettable. As I said, I think they’re entitled to meaningful review, and if they’re prosecuted before a military commission, I think they’re entitled to a fair trial. And I think both of those things, at this point in time, are doubtful.
And I guess that’s one of the things that concerns me. You know, both candidates have said, “Let’s close Guantanamo Bay.” And I don’t think there’s much disagreement about that. The bigger issue, though, is: and then what? And I really haven’t heard either side come out with a firm opinion on what the answer is to the “and then what” question, and I think that’s a critical issue that needs to be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: You were the chief prosecutor at Guantanamo. How did you know how the testimony that was gotten from the prisoners was coerced?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, at least from what I saw, whether it was the CIA or the Department of Defense or the FBI, whoever questioned the individual documented thoroughly, you know, when it started, what they did, who was present and what was said. There were some cases where I—in my opinion, we went too far. And I think that’s another distinction that’s lost on a lot of people. There is a difference, in my mind, in what you can do to obtain intelligence versus what you can do to obtain evidence to use in a criminal proceeding. And some of the things that were done may have worked well to obtain useful intelligence, but it crossed a line that made it not useful as evidence in an American court of justice. And there were some cases like that.
Waterboarding, to me, was a no-brainer. If you’re tying someone down and inducing them to believe they can either talk or possibly die, what they said may be useful for intelligence, but it has no place in an American court of justice. And when I was there, we were not going to use it. And I find it disturbing that to this day that the senior leadership for the military commissions continue to say that it will be up to a judge to decide. You know, the professional rules of conduct for attorneys say a prosecutor cannot offer any evidence obtained by illegal means. In my view, if you tie someone down and cause them to believe they can either talk or die, that’s not evidence that a prosecutor should be bringing into an American court of justice.
AMY GOODMAN: What other techniques do you think should not be used to get evidence?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: Well, again, I think waterboarding, to me, was an easy—a clear-cut example of being over the line. There were some other techniques that were used that I’m not sure if they’re still classified or not, so I can’t go into detail. But the Al Qahtani case was a good example. Prior to the transfer of the high-value detainees to Gitmo, the Qahtani case, in my view, was kind of what we referred to as the dirtiest case, as far as his treatment. He was never waterboarded, but the things that were done to him, in my view, made anything he said in our custody unreliable. So my direction to the prosecution was: build the case without using anything he ever said. That doesn’t excuse what happened to him in our custody, but that was a separate issue, if we could prove—
AMY GOODMAN: What happened to him?
COL. MORRIS DAVIS: That, I can’t say. Again, I’m not sure what’s classified and what’s not, and I just assume try to stay away from a security violation. But that was a case where I thought we could build a compelling case without using anything he ever said in our custody.
So, again, there were a few cases—I think, in the public’s mind, they may think it’s every case at Guantanamo Bay. The ones I saw, it was a significant minority of the cases, where, in my opinion, we crossed the line and went too far, rendering what the individual said unreliable for use in an American court of justice.
AMY GOODMAN: Air Force Colonel Morris Davis. He was the former chief prosecutor at Guantanamo, resigned late last year. He now heads the Air Force Judiciary.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 21/07/2008 07:38:17 (21/07/2008 16:38:17)|
MONUC : 26 PRISONNIERS MORTS DE FAIM DANS UNE PRISON DE LA RDC
QUI CONTRÔLE CETTE PRISON? L'ISLAM OU BUSH?
21 juillet 2008 – Au moins 26 prisonniers ont trouvé la mort des suites de malnutrition sévère et aiguë dans une prison de Mbuji Mayi en République démocratique du Congo (RDC) depuis février 2008, déplore lundi la Mission de l'Organisation des Nations Unies en RDC (MONUC).
« Dans cette prison de Mbuji Mayi (Kasaï Oriental) qui abrite 425 prisonniers au lieu de 200 conformément à sa capacité initiale, une nouvelle série de décès dans la nuit du 13 au 14 juillet est venue s'ajouter au bilan. Quatre détenus sont encore morts de faim, et le nombre total de morts depuis un mois dans cet établissement est de 10 », rapporte un communiqué de la MONUC.
Informée de ces décès, la section des droits de l'Homme de la MONUC a effectué une visite à la prison pour s'enquérir de la situation. Elle a exprimé son profond mécontentement aux autorités provinciales sur les conditions de vie des détenus.
«L'inquiétude de la MONUC est encore plus grande quand on constate parmi ces décès que beaucoup d'entre eux sont des prévenus, donc bénéficiant de la présomption d'innocence. Ils ne sont pas jugés à cause des lenteurs de la procédure judiciaire», a dit Assiongbon Tettekpoe, officier des droits de l'Homme de la MONUC à Mbuji Mayi.
Les quatre prisonniers qui viennent de décéder font partie d'une liste de 30 détenus dont l'état de santé avait été jugé préoccupant et nécessitant une prise en charge médicale appropriée.
Selon la MONUC, il y aurait encore une vingtaine de détenus entre la vie et la mort, incapables de bénéficier de soins médicaux du fait de leur pauvreté.
En attendant qu'une solution durable soit trouvée par les autorités centrales et locales et qu'elles se décident à prendre en charge convenablement les prisonniers, la MONUC pourvoit chaque semaine la prison en eau. Elle a, en outre, acheminé du maïs par deux fois, entre janvier et mai 2008, pour ces prisonniers.
Lors de sa conférence de presse hebdomadaire du 16 juillet, la MONUC a rappelé qu'il est de la responsabilité première des autorités congolaises de tout mettre en œuvre pour assurer des conditions de détention décentes aux détenus de la prison centrale de Mbuji Mayi et à ceux des autres centres pénitentiaires de toute la République démocratique du Congo.
CONDITIONS DE VIE : http://www.monuc.org/news.aspx?newsID=16745
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 22/07/2008 02:07:27 (22/07/2008 11:07:27)|
UN MILLION DE NOMS SUR LA LISTE ANTITERRORISTE AMÉRICAINE
Le mardi 22 juillet 2008
Yousouf Islam alias Cat Stevens s'est vu refuser l'entrée sur le sol américain, parce que son nom est sur la liste.
Qu'ont en commun une religieuse catholique, un pilote de ligne ou Cat Stevens? Rien, si ce n'est de figurer parmi plus d'un million d'autres noms sur la liste de surveillance antiterroriste américaine.
Cette liste, censée contenir les noms de terroristes ou d'individus soupçonnés de liens avec le terrorisme, a fortement gonflé depuis le 11 septembre et empêche nombre de personnes qui n'ont a priori rien à se reprocher de prendre l'avion, assure l'Association américaine des libertés civiles (ACLU).
Ce chiffre de plus d'un million provient d'un rapport du ministère de la Justice sur le Centre de surveillance du terrorisme, division du FBI qui alimente la liste de surveillance, précise l'ACLU.
Le Centre «avait plus de 700 000 noms dans sa base de données en avril 2007 et la liste grossit de plus de 20 000 fiches par mois en moyenne», selon un rapport de l'Inspecteur général du département de la Justice, ajoute l'association.
«S'il y avait un million de terroristes menaçant les États-Unis, nos rues seraient en flammes», confie à l'AFP Barry Steinhardt, directeur du programme Technologie et Liberté de l'ACLU.
Non, cette liste ne comprend pas un million de personnes, conteste Leonard Boyle, directeur du Centre de surveillance du terrorisme. Et il s'agit d'un outil efficace, affirme-t-il, démentant également que des milliers d'Américains soient détenus et confrontés à des tracasseries quotidiennes parce qu'ils figurent sur cette liste.
Ainsi, Soeur Glenn Anne McPhee, ancienne secrétaire d'éducation à la Conférence américaine des évêques catholiques, s'est retrouvée sur la liste parce qu'un Afghan avait utilisé McPhee comme alias, selon l'ACLU et le San Francisco Faith, bulletin en ligne du diocèse où travaille la religieuse.
Pendant neuf mois, à partir d'octobre 2003, elle a fait l'objet d'enquêtes poussées et a dû demander à son évêque d'intervenir auprès de Karl Rove, principal conseiller politique du président Bush à l'époque, pour que son nom soit retiré de la liste noire.
Nelson Mandela avait eu besoin d'un ordre du Congrès pour obtenir d'être enlevé de la même liste.
Cat Stevens, le chanteur de la fin des années 60 devenu musulman, qui s'appelle désormais Yousouf Islam et n'a aucune trace d'activités liées au terrorisme dans son dossier, s'est vu refuser l'entrée sur le sol américain.
Et son homonyme, Cat (diminutif de Catherine) Stevens, épouse d'un sénateur américain, a rencontré des problèmes pour prendre l'avion, relève l'ACLU.
Robert Campbell, pilote de ligne pendant 22 ans, s'est retrouvé lui aussi sur la liste des personnes interdites de vol.
«Je suis autorisé (...) à piloter un avion, mais si je souhaite voyager en tant que passager, je suis interdit de vol», a-t-il expliqué en 2007 à la télévision américaine.
Ce retraité, qui fut aussi pilote de la Marine américaine, ne comprend toujours pas pourquoi il se retrouve sur cette liste.
En revanche, «beaucoup de noms de vrais terroristes ne sont pas sur la liste qui est envoyée au personnel des compagnies aériennes, des agences de voyages, de la douane», estime Barry Steinhardt.
«Souvent, ils ne communiquent pas les noms des pires terroristes aux gens qui en ont besoin, parce qu'ils ont peur (...) que les noms se retrouvent sur la place publique», selon lui.
--Message edité par maria le 2008-07-22 11:07:39--
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 26/07/2008 08:51:12 (26/07/2008 17:51:12)|
CIA HARSH INTERROGATION METHODS APPROVED
July 26, 2008 12:00am
THE Justice Department told the CIA in 2002 that its interrogators would be safe from torture prosecution if they believed "in good faith" that harsh techniques used to break prisoners would not cause "prolonged mental harm".
That heavily censored memo, released yesterday, approved the CIA's harsh interrogation techniques method by method, but warned that if the circumstances changed, interrogators could be running foul of anti-torture laws.
The 2002 legal opinion, signed by then assistant attorney-general Jay Bybee, was issued the day he wrote a memo for the White House that defined torture as only those "extreme acts" that caused pain similar in intensity to that caused by death or organ failure.
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 28/07/2008 01:17:35 (28/07/2008 10:17:35)|
NEW TORTURE MEMO FROM 2002 IS DISCLOSED
JUST LIKE THE USSR
JUST LIKE NORTH KOREA
JUST LIKE CHINA
JUST LIKE FASCIST JAPAN
JUST LIKE THE NAZIS
WE HAVE NO REGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE
WE HAVE NO REGARD FOR BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS
WE ARE NOW ALL THE THINGS WE ONCE STOOD AGAINST
YES, THAT IS THE USA I AM TALKING ABOUT*
Interrogators would be on safe ground if they had an 'honest belief' that suspects would suffer no 'prolonged mental harm,' the Justice Department told the CIA.
From Times Wire Services
July 25, 2008
WASHINGTON -- The Justice Department in 2002 told the CIA that its interrogators would be safe from prosecution for violations of anti-torture laws if they believed "in good faith" that harsh techniques used to break prisoners' will would not cause "prolonged mental harm."
That heavily censored memo http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/safefree/cia_3686_001.pdf -- obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union, which released it Thursday -- approved the CIA's harsh interrogation techniques method by method, but warned that if the circumstances changed, interrogators could run afoul of anti-torture laws.
"Although an honest belief need not be reasonable, such a belief is easier to establish where there is a reasonable basis for it," said the memo, dated Aug. 1, 2002, and signed by then-Assistant Atty. Gen. Jay Bybee, the Washington Post reported http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/24/AR200807240… .
The memo was issued the same day he wrote a memo for then-White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/dojinterrogationmemo2… defining torture as "extreme acts" causing pain akin to death or organ failure. The legal opinion defining torture was withdrawn more than two years later.
Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr told the Associated Press on Thursday that the interrogation techniques currently authorized by the Bush administration are legal. It's unclear which of those outlined in the newly released memo are still used. Atty. Gen. Michael B. Mukasey has refused to address whether waterboarding, for example, is legal since the CIA no longer uses it.
Waterboarding is a form of simulated drowning. CIA Director Michael V. Hayden banned it in 2006, but government officials have said it remains a possibility if approved by the attorney general, the CIA chief and the president.
Secret Bush administration memos authorizing harsh interrogation techniques have been made public starting in 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal revealed detainee mistreatment. Thursday's release adds to the growing record of the still-secret program launched after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The ACLU also obtained two other documents http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/36104res20080724.html dealing with the CIA's interrogation program. The Bybee memo specifically approved interrogation techniques that were devised for Al Qaeda suspects who were resistant to traditional questioning.
The standards used to judge how physically rough an interrogation could be are blacked out. But interrogations that stress a detainee psychologically or emotionally were not allowed to cause "prolonged mental harm" -- defined as lasting months or even years. The memo suggests that psychiatrists or psychologists should be consulted prior to interrogations to assess the likely effect on the prisoner.
The new documents indicate that senior Bush administration officials were aware of the controversial and potentially problematic use of certain interrogation methods.
--Message edité par maria le 2008-07-29 12:01:56--
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 01/08/2008 22:17:35 (02/08/2008 07:17:35)|
REPORT: TORTURE RAMPANT IN PALESTINIAN PRISONS
RÉALITÉ QUE NOUS RETROUVONS DANS TOUS LES PAYS, SOUS LE COUVERT DES LOIS ANTITERRORISTES MISES EN PLACE PAR LE PRÉSIDENT BUSH ET LES NATIONS UNIES.
Report, Al-Haq, 28 July 2008
Today Al-Haq, as a Palestinian human rights organization dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), is releasing its report, "Torturing Each Other: The Widespread Practices of Arbitrary Detention and Torture in the Palestinian Territory." This report documents and analyzes arbitrary arrests, acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment against individuals in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by various Palestinian security or military agencies and personnel. These illegal practices have had a horrific physical and psychological effect on hundreds of Palestinian citizens and the society at large.
In the wake of Friday's explosion in Gaza that killed six people and injured tens more, Al-Haq is again reminded of the importance and timing of this report. The ensuing arrests of Fatah-affiliated individuals and attacks on Fatah buildings and offices in Gaza over the weekend, which were then followed by widespread arrests of Hamas members in the West Bank, are evidence that the political infighting that has sparked the growing use of torture and ill-treatment of detainees has not waned. In this moment, Al-Haq therefore calls upon the authorities and security forces in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to refrain from exacting revenge on these detained individuals, to release those who have been arrested arbitrarily and to properly monitor the treatment of all detainees under their control. The alternative would be to further deepen the pain and instability within Palestinian society that has resulted partly from the growing use of torture and ill-treatment by these groups over the past year.
Ever since the de facto Hamas authority seized control of the Gaza Strip and the OPT became effectively divided along authority and territorial lines, Al-Haq has diligently monitored and documented the outbreak of the use of torture within the OPT. By taking sworn statements from victims, eyewitnesses, lawyers, families and others, we have monitored the situation inside prisons and detention centers in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and in evaluating our findings, have discovered a host of unsettling and unacceptable facts.
Al-Haq has found that the use of torture is driven primarily by political interests within the fractured political context of the OPT, and most often as a form of revenge against perceived political enemies. In the past year alone, Al-Haq has taken more than 150 sworn statements and documented over 2000 arrests in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This documentation confirms that the use of torture and ill-treatment against detainees has clearly become a widespread trend. And while there are some discrepancies between the intensity and rate of these practices in different areas, this trend prevails throughout the entire OPT.
In the immediate aftermath of the creation of the de facto Hamas authority in the Gaza Strip, when political tension was most severe and peace most fragile, virtually all security groups in the West Bank shared in arresting, and then using torture or ill-treatment against, Hamas-affiliated targets. Although after the first three months many of these groups stopped these practices, torture, ill-treatment and arbitrary arrests continued to be used by the General Intelligence Service and the Preventative Security Force. Meanwhile, in the Gaza Strip, the Executive Force and the Hamas-affiliated Izz-al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were using similar tactics against Fatah targets. The practices have been vicious and inhuman, even leading to the deaths of at least three detainees in the Gaza Strip and one in the West Bank. As Al-Haq reports in detail, they are all in violation of Palestinian law, human rights law and the basic standards of humanity as embodied in international law.
This widespread use of torture to terrorize, extract information from, and intimidate perceived political enemies within the OPT decreased in intensity by the end of 2007 and early 2008, but it still continues today. New trends have included an increase in psychological torture, an increase in arbitrary arrests, and arrests and detention carried out in violation of the Palestinian Basic Law and penal procedural laws. And while government officials have pledged to bring the security forces into line with the law and punish those responsible, the reality on the ground remains bleak. By not taking action against the perpetrators, and in the absence of legitimate and sustained monitoring -- internally and externally -- of their security forces, these officials are encouraging these illegal practices.
With this report, Al-Haq hopes to highlight and expose this horrifying and blatantly illegal trend, and to bring to light an aspect of Palestinian life that is spreading fear amongst the population and undermining the legitimacy of the authorities throughout the OPT. Most importantly, Al-Haq calls upon the respective Palestinian authorities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to put an end to arbitrary arrests, torture and ill-treatment of detainees and to punish those responsible. Finally, Al-Haq would like to thank all those who shared their stories for their courage in speaking out against these abhorrent practices.
Download the executive summary (English) [PDF]
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 02/09/2008 00:55:58 (02/09/2008 09:55:58)|
LES GUILLOTINES ET LA LOI MARTIALE AUX ÉTATS-UNIS
Message qui laisse à réfléchir
Beaucoup de gens avec qui j’ai discuté de camps de concentration, de listes red/blue et de réduction de la population via les chemtrails ont ri de moi, particulièrement en ce qui a trait aux camps de concentration équipés de guillotines ainsi que de chambres à gaz. Voici quelques informations.
Pamela Shuffert, en reportage aux USA
23 juin 2008
Un sergent-chef/guide de l’Armée/SPEC OPS man de fort Lewis, Washington, que je venais tout juste de rencontrer alors que je voyageais du Montana en Caroline du Nord, me révéla ceci :
« Les guillotines sont réelles et j’allais entraîner les hommes de mon peloton la semaine prochaine à savoir comment les employer lors d’opérations classées ultra secrètes, à Fort Lewis (…) jusqu’à ce que vous me disiez qu’elles allaient être utilisées contre nos concitoyens américains sous la prochaine loi martiale ! »
Or maintenant, lui et les hommes à qui il parla de mon reportage sur les guillotines utilisées contre des concitoyens américains sont ramassés et pourchassés comme des chiens, des humvees et des hélicoptères entourent leur maisons et maintenant il est en fuite ! Juste parce qu’ils ont découvert par moi la vérité à propos de la loi martiale et des guillotines, et qu’ils se sont mis d’accord entre eux pour ne jamais suivre le terrible programme du Nouvel Ordre Mondial !
Je me faisais conduire en autobus de Butte, au Montana, vers la Caroline du Nord, quand je rencontrai un jeune homme vêtu de pied en cap d’un uniforme impressionnant de guide de l’armée. Il portait un calibre Magnum 45 et plusieurs couteaux, quelques téléphones et un sac à dos militaire en plus d’autres équipements. Il me confia être sergent-chef à Fort Lewis !
C’est l’endroit où de nombreuses guillotines modernes sont entreposées depuis longtemps, pour utilisation lors de la loi martiale. Je l’allumai d’abord avant de lui dire que je savais tout au sujet des guillotines modernes de Fort Lewis. Il eut un choc ! Il me dit : « Comment savez-vous ça ? C’est de l’information classée top secret ! » Il admit ensuite qu’il était chrétien. Je lui dis que l’Armée américaine ne le disait pas à de jeunes hommes comme lui, mais que ces guillotines allaient être utilisées contre des Américains et des chrétiens dans un avenir rapproché, sous la loi martiale, pour décapiter tous les résistants au Nouvel Ordre Mondial. Plus il écoutait, plus il devenait en colère.
Employant quelques jurons choisis, il me dit : « Ils ne nous ont jamais dit que cela serait utilisé contre des Américains sous la Loi Martiale … pour se débarrasser de tous les chrétiens et de tous les résistants au Nouvel Ordre Mondial ! Nous pensions qu’elles seraient employées en Irak ou quelque chose du genre ! »
Puis, il me demanda de lui en parler davantage. Il m’a même filmée. Finalement, furieux de ce qu’on leur avait si bien lavé le cerveau et qu’on les avait trompés, il me dit : « Je ne m’associerai jamais à ce programme du Nouvel Ordre Mondial ! Je suis chrétien ! Je vais contacter les hommes de mon peloton (64) et ceux en qui j’ai confiance et qui sont chrétiens. Je vais leur dire la vérité. J’étais supposé me rendre à Fort Hood, la semaine prochaine, en vue d’un entraînement d’Opérations Spéciales, pour ensuite revenir former mes hommes à savoir comment opérer ces guillotines ! Il y a un centre souterrain spécial où se trouvent les guillotines … On ne nous permet pas d’y apporter des caméras, des téléphones cellulaires, etc., à cause de la haute sécurité et du silence entourant ces guillotines. Elles mesurent six pieds et demi de haut [2 m], avec des entraves pour les mains et un emplacement pour la tête telles qu’elles se présentent. Nous devions utiliser des mannequins pour nous pratiquer … Mais, maintenant, je refuse cette mission et je vais contacter les hommes sous mes ordres et en qui j’ai confiance … qui ne voudrons pas s’associer à ce programme du Nouvel Ordre Mondial et qui vont plutôt sortir de là avec des humvees, des armes et tout ce qui nous tombera sous la main pour combattre ce programme du Nouvel Ordre Mondial ! »
Nous nous quittâmes à Indianapolis … Je m’inquiétais des conséquences.
J’allais bientôt les connaître ! Je l’appelai le jour même. Il me dit qu’il avait parlé à sa sœur et à sa famille, et qu’ils étaient tous sous le choc … Ils étaient tous militaires … Ils lui avaient dit : « Comment as-tu appris ce programme de la loi martiale du Nouvel Ordre Mondial ? Tout ça, c’est classifié top secret ! » Lorsqu’il leur parla de moi (je lui avais donné une copie de mon magazine Airman, avec la célèbre caricature des Forces Armées de l’Air Américaines [USAF] de mon père … il en fut fort impressionné et étonné), il me confia que sa tante de la USAF avait soumis mon nom aux ordinateurs de la USAF pour vérifier où je me situais aux yeux des Forces. Il me confia : « Elle a dit que vous êtes sous avertissement (sujette à arrestation et interrogatoire) et que vous êtes classée par la USAF comme une menace à la sécurité nationale ! »
(Moi ?? une menace à la sécurité nationale ??? Juste pour avoir dit la vérité à l’Amérique au sujet de la Loi Martiale à venir !) Ce guide de l’Armée m’a dit que, s’il avait été du côté du Programme du Nouvel Ordre Mondial, il était autorisé, en tant que guide de l’Armée, avec permis de haute sécurité et beaucoup de formation d’opérations spéciales, à me faire sortir de l’autobus et à me tuer pour avoir appris cette information classifiée… ou il aurait pu appeler la base militaire la plus proche et faire venir des véhicules pour m’arrêter immédiatement et m’amener pour interrogatoire et être ensuite liquidée. Voilà à quel point mes enquêtes internes et mes informations sont vraiment classées secrètes !
Et hier, quand je l’ai rappelé, il avait encore plus d’informations scandaleuses à me communiquer. « Je suis en ce moment en fuite … ils essaient de m’attraper … et ma sœur qui est dans la USAF aussi ! Notre paye, nos services militaires et nos comptes de banques ont tous été fermés … aujourd’hui, nous n’avons plus accès à rien ! Ils sont en train d’arrêter la moitié des hommes de mon peloton … des hommes à qui j’ai parlé et qui étaient d’accord pour ne jamais s’associer au programme de la Loi Martiale du Nouvel Ordre Mondial … Tous leurs payes, leurs services et leurs comptes de banque ont été fermés … des hélicoptères militaires et des humvees encerclent leurs maisons … On les surveille et on les cueille un après l’autre … un des hommes de mon peloton s’est défendu lorsqu’ils ont défoncé sa maison, il a tiré sur cinq soldats qui essayaient de le prendre (plusieurs ont été tués) avant qu’ils réussissent à l’arrêter !
Nous sommes maintenant en fuite, ma sœur et moi … ils sont après nous aussi… »
Je suis en ce moment au téléphone avec le sergent-chef Donnie. Sa tante qui a cherché mon nom dans les ordinateurs de la USAF est interrogée par les autorités de la USAF. Je suis sûre qu’ils sont en colère contre moi aussi ! Ils doivent me rechercher également, ces derniers temps … avec ce scandale militaire qui surgit et moi au milieu de tout ça !
Répandez ce message à tout le monde ! Ces militaires paient le gros prix pour avoir dit qu’ils ne s’associeraient jamais au programme militaire du Nouvel Ordre Mondial visant à assassiner d’innocents Américains et à détruire notre Constitution, et notre liberté, et les gens de foi et de caractère de notre pays. Priez pour le sergent-chef Donnie Boysel et sa sœur maintenant, ainsi que pour les hommes que l’on chasse comme des chiens … pour les interroger et les tuer !
Priez également pour moi ! Je peux être prise très bientôt à cause de mon rôle dans ce scandale militaire. Priez pour la miséricorde de Jésus afin qu’Il me préserve dans tout ça !
Faites passer ces nouvelles de violation à toute votre liste d’adresses de courriel ! Et maintenant, vous savez … les guillotines sont réelles ! (Apocalypse 20:4.) Il m’a dit qu’elles sont partout … à Fort Hood, à Fort Bragg, à Fort Lewis, dans toutes les bases militaires américaines, y compris en Allemagne où il fut en poste (oui, les Européens seront aussi décapités à cause de leur foi, lors du Nouvel Ordre Mondial !)
Faites passer et priez pour moi, pour Donnie et les chrétiens qu’ils pourchassent à partir de Fort Lewis ! Pamela Shuffert, reportage en direct de par tout le pays.
Note de Ber : Beaucoup de gens considèrent que Mme Shuffert n’est pas une source d’informations crédible. Mais j’ai beaucoup entendu parler de ces guillotines de par de nombreuses autres sources. Pourquoi des guillotines ? Rapide et sans douleur, si vous pouvez passer au travers de la peur psychologique. Ce sont des outils modernes. Ils vous y mettent debout, vous font pencher dessus et vous décapitent ; ils l’ouvrent et votre corps s’affale dans la benne du camion derrière, pour qu’on en dispose. Simple, efficace, effrayant.
Sur une note plus positive. Menez-vous une vie vous donnant droit à la protection de Dieu ?
« Hajin. Les yeux de l’Eternel sont sur les justes, et ses oreilles sont attentives à leur cri. 16Pe. La face de l’Eternel est contre ceux qui font le mal, pour exterminer de la terre leur mémoire. 17Tsade. Quand les justes crient, l’Eternel les exauce, et il les délivre de toutes leurs détresses. 18Koph.
L’Eternel est près de ceux qui ont le coeur déchiré par la douleur, et il délivre ceux qui ont l’esprit abattu. 19Res. Le juste a des maux en grand nombre, mais l’Eternel le délivre de tous » (Psaume 34:15-19).
Le mot « justes » se trouve partout dans cette belle portion des Écritures. Dieu parle de Ses enfants. Il nous a déclarés justes. Sa Parole confirme que nous sommes « justice de Dieu en lui » (2 Corinthiens 5:21). L’apôtre Paul, écrivant à l’Église de Rome, déclare : « Car la promesse d’être héritier du monde, n’a pas été faite à Abraham, ou à sa semence, par la Loi, mais par la justice de la foi » (Romains 4:13).
Comment êtes-vous sauvé(e) ? Vous croyez du fond du cœur que Jésus est mort au Calvaire, il y a 2 000 ans. Vous confessez de la bouche ce que vous croyez dans votre cœur ― que, non seulement est-Il mort, mais Il est aussi ressuscité des morts ― que Jésus est vivant et qu’Il est à la droite de Dieu le Père, là où Il nous représente, vous et moi.
Comment savez-vous que vous êtes sauvé(e) ? Vous savez que vous êtes sauvé(e) parce que Dieu l’a dit dans Sa Parole et que Son Esprit porte témoignage dans votre esprit que vous êtes enfant de Dieu. Ce qui veut dire que vous êtes compté(e) parmi les justes.
Dans la Bible, il y a de nombreuses promesses envers les justes. Dieu sait prendre soin de ceux qui Lui appartiennent. Il entend les cris du juste et Il agit en leur faveur.
[Note de Moisson des Élus : Ce courriel vient encore confirmer que le Moshiach, le messie juif, s’en vient ; que les prophéties de l’Apocalypse sont sur le point d’aboutir. Dans des articles précédents, nous avons parlé de l’installation progressive des Sept Lois de Noé dans les divers systèmes judiciaires du monde.
Nous avons expliqué que leur transgression entraînera la peine de mort par décapitation. On va guillotiner les chrétiens !
Nous, les Enfants de Dieu en Jésus-Christ, nous sommes considérés les ennemis publics nº 1 par les dirigeants talmudiques qui ne supportent pas la vérité divine. Il est donc plus que temps que tous les membres du Corps de Christ sortent de leur torpeur, s’ils sont endormis, et qu’ils se mettent à étudier la Parole plus profondément que jamais auparavant, avant qu’elle ne soit interdite de possession, et qu’ils prient avec une ferveur renouvelée. Il nous faut sortir de notre confort spirituel assoupissant et retrouver notre premier amour. C’est ainsi que nous pourrons nous préparer pour la dernière grande évangélisation mondiale. Alors pourra venir la fin au travers de laquelle nous recevrons un sceau spécial (Apocalypse 7:3 ; 9:4), signe de la protection de Dieu sur les justes.]
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 11/11/2008 00:09:50 (11/11/2008 09:09:50)|
TORTURE IN AMERICA'S FEDERAL PRISONS
Murderers, Torturers, and Teachers
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
by Mark Yannone
Since 2003, Mr. Harley G. Lappin has been the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The well-being of America's 202,164 federal prisoners is his responsibility.
At the moment, one of those federal prisoners is that infamous mass murderer and torturer Irwin Schiff. Wait! I got him confused with the current president-select of the United States, George W. Bush! No, Irwin Schiff, like Bill Benson, is an old, old man who has dedicated most of his life and sacrificed a great deal of his freedom to teaching the American public that the federal income tax does not apply to most Americans.
Unlike mass murderer and torturer George W. Bush, who still enjoys his freedom and still travels the world in the utmost luxury of his own jets and limousines and is waited on hand and foot 24 hours a day, this 80-year-old Irwin Schiff, mild-mannered teacher, writer, and lecturer, travels the country on buses, in steel chains and shackles, as he is moved endlessly from one federal holding tank to another, day after day, week after week, sometimes losing a body part to gangrene and amputation.
Irwin is serving his death sentence for trying like hell to tell the truth in the courtroom of US District Court judge Kent Dawson. Judge Kent Dawson is perhaps best known for his famous quote "I will not allow the law in my courtroom!" That was from the case of United States of America and Kent Dawson v. Irwin Schiff, a Tax Honesty trial (of sorts) that contained many unique exchanges between judge and defendant and between judge and jury. Not satisfied that 80-year-old Irwin would die in the 13.5-year prison sentence that he gave him in 2005, judge Kent Dawson saw fit in September 2008 to pile on another 11 months to Irwin's 163-month sentence. Irwin Schiff would have to survive his "diesel therapy" and disgusting prison food until he is 99 years old before he could be released and again subject the American public to the threat of murder and torture. Oops! I did it again. I accidentally confused our innocent, gentle, truth-teller Irwin Schiff with the mass murderer and torturer George W. Bush. I confess I'm looking forward to George W. Bush's war crimes trial as soon as he vacates his stolen office.
That brings us back to the topic of torture and abuse at the hands of federal incarcerators. While Irwin Schiff endures weeks of "diesel therapy" in chains and shackles, Harley G. Lappin, Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, continues to fill the Internet with his connections to torture and abuse.
If you'd like to drop Harley G. Lappin a line to express your thoughts about the Bureau of Prison's maltreatment of 80-year-old Irwin Schiff, his address is:
Harley G. Lappin
Bureau of Prisons
320 1st St NW
Washington DC 20534
Messages postés : 21288
| Posté le 03/12/2008 12:51:52 (03/12/2008 21:51:52)|