President George Bush
admitted on
Wednesday that he has authorized the CIA to establish a network of
Secret Prisons.
Previously they have justified, rejected and "refused to comment"on this gross breach of American Values. All the while continuing to kidnap, illegally detain and torture. There has been NO announcement or indication that these Secret prisons have ceased operations or been closed.
It is illegal to kidnap, (no jurisdiction to 'arrest') transport, (rendition for illegal purposes) illegally detain, (hold without trial or legal access) and torture ANYONE on foreign soil. Both by those countries own laws and by American law. Yet President Bush has admitted authorizing the CIA to do exactly that.
Here is the
admission of the President of the United States that he has violated these laws.
In some cases, we determine that individuals we have captured pose a significant threat, or may have intelligence that we and our allies need to have to prevent new attacks. Many are al Qaeda operatives or Taliban fighters trying to conceal their identities, and they withhold information that could save American lives. In these cases, it has been necessary to move these individuals to an environment where they can be held secretly [sic], questioned by experts, and -- when appropriate -- prosecuted for terrorist acts.
In addition to the terrorists held at Guantanamo, a small number of suspected terrorist leaders and operatives captured during the war have been held and questioned outside the United States, in a separate program operated by the Central Intelligence Agency......
.......The security of our nation and the lives of our citizens depend on our ability to learn what these terrorists know.
Edit
Many specifics of this program, including where these detainees have been held and the details of their confinement, cannot be divulged.......
Today, I'm going to share with you some of the examples provided by our intelligence community of how this program has saved lives; why it remains vital to the security of the United States, and our friends and allies; and why it deserves the support of the United States Congress and the American people
Within months of September the 11th, 2001, we captured a man known as Abu Zubaydah.. We believe that Zubaydah was a senior terrorist leader and a trusted associate of Osama bin Laden. Our intelligence community believes he had run a terrorist camp in Afghanistan.....
.....After he recovered, Zubaydah was defiant and evasive. He declared his hatred of America. During questioning, he at first disclosed what he thought was nominal information -- and then stopped all cooperation........
Edit
We knew that Zubaydah had more information that could save innocent lives, but he stopped talking. As his questioning proceeded, it became clear that he had received training on how to resist interrogation. And so the CIA used an alternative set of procedures. These procedures were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution, and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively and determined them to be lawful. I cannot describe the specific methods used -- I think you understand why -- if I did, it would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning, and to keep information from us that we need to prevent new attacks on our country. But I can say the procedures were tough, and they were safe, and lawful, and necessary.
Zubaydah was questioned using these procedures, and soon he began to provide information on key al Qaeda operatives.......
This program has been subject to multiple legal reviews by the Department of Justice and CIA lawyers; they've determined it complied with our laws. This program has received strict oversight by the CIA's Inspector General. A small number of key leaders from both political parties on Capitol Hill were briefed about this program.
I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it -- and I will not authorize it. Last year, my administration worked with Senator John McCain, and I signed into law the Detainee Treatment Act, which established the legal standard for treatment of detainees wherever they are held. I support this act. And as we implement this law, our government will continue to use every lawful method to obtain intelligence that can protect innocent people, and stop another attack like the one we experienced on September the 11th, 2001.
Mr. President if indeed, "These procedures were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution, and our treaty obligations." THEN WHY ARE YOU SEEKING TO CHANGE THE LAW?
Let us take the case of Zubaydah and let us give President Bush the benefit of the doubt, where possible. Perhaps the way his seizure was legal "U.S. and Pakistani forces kicked down his door in Faisalabad, the Saudi-born jihadist was the first al-Qaeda detainee to be shipped to a secret prison abroad." His transportation to a Secret Prison in a foreign nation was certainly not, not without the permission of that countries government. NO government has come forward to say it has given permission, many have denied it or have launched investigations. The President has violated the law of foreign nations. Mr. Zubaydah has been held without trial or representation, in a foreign country, without that country's authorization and, by the presidents own admission tortured,for over FOUR years. The President has violated the law of foreign nations.
Mr. Bush says "I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it -- and I will not authorize it." Instead what he has admitted to is using "an alternative set of procedures." They are not standard, authorized and recognized interrogation techniques. They are 'an alternative" to standard, authorized and recognized interrogation techniques...what does that mean? Is it torture or not?
President Bush has said that he "does not torture." And yet throughout his administration he has continually sought to change the definition of "torture." An understanding of what torture is, a definition of torture that has been accepted and enforced around the world. The same standards have been in place, with refinements, since at least 1882 when the Geneva Conventions, and were codified and ratified most recently in 1987. Why change the definition of torture if you are not engaged in torture?
The Geneva Conventions, The United Nations, and International Law all define what President Bush calls "an alternative set of procedures." as torture.
Yesterday it was announced that the US Army, in response to its own record of torture at Abu Ghraib, specifically banned "an alternative set of procedures" in its Field Manual.
Here are the "alternative set of procedures" that the army banned.
....forced nakedness, hooding, beating prisoners, sexually humiliating them, threatening them with dogs, depriving them of food or water, performing mock executions, shocking them with electricity, burning them, causing other pain and a technique called "water boarding" that simulates drowning
For the first time in its history, the army has had to change its regulations to stop the ability of its civilian leaders to order it to torture prisoners.
But these very methods of torture are not only still in use by the CIA, The President of the United States seeks the complicity of the Republican Congress in codifying them for future use. The President of the United States is also asking to be retroactively pardoned for employing them. The President of the United States seeks ...again...to be declared above the law, so that he may continue to torture.
Interrogation Methods Rejected by Military Win Bush's Support
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: September 8, 2006
Many of the harsh interrogation techniques repudiated by the Pentagon on Wednesday would be made lawful by legislation put forward the same day by the Bush administration. And the courts would be forbidden from intervening.
The proposal is in the last 10 pages of an 86-page bill devoted mostly to military commissions, and it is a tangled mix of cross-references and pregnant omissions.
But legal experts say it adds up to an apparently unique interpretation of the Geneva Conventions, one that could allow C.I.A. operatives and others to use many of the very techniques disavowed by the Pentagon, including stress positions, sleep deprivation and extreme temperatures......
.......The new bill would continue to give the C.I.A. the substantial freedom it has long enjoyed, while the revisions to the Army Field Manual announced Wednesday would further restrict military interrogators.
Why is the President taking this unprecedented and immoral action now? After engaging in them with impunity for nearly five years? He tells us in his speech.
Some may ask: Why are you acknowledging this program now? There are two reasons why I'm making these limited disclosures today. First, we have largely completed our questioning of the men -- and to start the process for bringing them to trial, we must bring them into the open. Second, the Supreme Court's recent decision has impaired our ability to prosecute terrorists through military commissions, and has put in question the future of the CIA program. In its ruling on military commissions, the Court determined that a provision of the Geneva Conventions known as "Common Article Three" applies to our war with al Qaeda. This article includes provisions that prohibit "outrages upon personal dignity" and "humiliating and degrading treatment." The problem is that these and other provisions of Common Article Three are vague and undefined, and each could be interpreted in different ways by American or foreign judges. And some believe our military and intelligence personnel involved in capturing and questioning terrorists could now be at risk of prosecution under the War Crimes Act -- simply for doing their jobs in a thorough and professional way.
So today, I'm asking Congress to pass legislation that will clarify the rules for our personnel fighting the war on terror. First, I'm asking Congress to list the specific, recognizable offenses that would be considered crimes under the War Crimes Act -- so our personnel can know clearly what is prohibited in the handling of terrorist enemies. Second, I'm asking that Congress make explicit that by following the standards of the Detainee Treatment Act our personnel are fulfilling America's obligations under Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions. Third, I'm asking that Congress make it clear that captured terrorists cannot use the Geneva Conventions as a basis to sue our personnel in courts -- in U.S. courts.
Who is the Commander in Chief of these personnel? Who has ordered these War Crimes of which he speaks? Who is he really trying to indemnify from war crimes and crimes against humanity?
Himself.
Why?
Because the Supreme Court has ruled that his actions are illegal and must be stopped..
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Presidents network of Secret Torture Prisons, his Torture and Illegal Detention programs, are against the law. they have ruled that The President is bound by the Rule of Law. If the President does not obtain indemnity from Congress, he is a War Criminal.
Something needs to be said that is a clear message that our rule of law is intact and the standards for perjury and obstruction of justice are not gray. And I think it is most important that we make that statement and that it be on the record for history.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, in different times
"It is hard to imagine that a generation or two ago, a majority of Americans would have greeted news of Presidential crimes and cover-ups with a shrug."
Senator Sam Brownback, in different times
We can not allow this to go unopposed. We can not allow Congress to retroactively legislate War Crimes immunity for the President and his enablers. We can not allow even the man who holds the most powerful office in the world to escape the consequences of the War Crimes he has committed.
Please, please call, write, e-mail and fax your representatives in your representative democracy. This is your government.
"All it takes for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
"As long as one of us is in chains, none of us are free"
Fred Pruitt
"When we are all Abu Zubaydah, there will be no Abu Zubaydah."
Bluesee
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings."
John F. Kennedy
Thanks to everyone at The Pony Express for their research and advice!