AP: Obama Team Debating Violating UN Convention On Torture

[MessiahRp]

President-elect Barack Obama is preparing to prohibit the use of waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques by ordering the CIA to follow military rules for questioning prisoners, according to two U.S. officials familiar with drafts of the plans. Still under debate is whether to allow exceptions in extraordinary cases.

. . . Obama's changes may not be absolute. His advisers are considering adding a classified loophole to the rules that could allow the CIA to use some interrogation methods not specifically authorized by the Pentagon, the officials said. They said the intent is not to use that as an opening for possible use of waterboarding, an interrogation technique that simulates drowning.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/1/18/94122/7093

---------------

Thoughts on this?


Rp

[originalpckelly]

1. Uh whuh?

:shrug:

Uh oh.

I mean if they think it works in extraordinary situations, which it doesn't, what does that mean?

[MessiahRp]

2. That's sort of what I was thinking...

I am of the belief that there should be no ambiguity... no torture should be allowed and there shouldn't be even a question about anything that might be borderline.

Rp

[TahitiNut]

3. Ya see, the thing about slippery slopes is ...

... it's sure as hell difficult to climb back up them. :puke:

[MessiahRp]

6. This is definitely true...

It has always been my fear that the more Bush got away with a Presidential Power grab the less likely that even a Democrat would ever fully give those powers back. It's this type of thinking that only enhances the argument of why the Bush Administration needs to be prosecuted. So Obama's Administration and every Administration afterward understands that they can't get away with this shit, it's illegal, it will be prosecuted and there is a line you cannot cross.

Rp

[LakeSamish706]

4. I would say that Obama needs to hear from the people on this! Don't think....

that anyone will agree with this train of thought, torture is torture and should be Prosecuted just as the US did to the Japanese following WW2.

[B o d i]

5. If the loophole is to only use enhanced interrogation on the Bush administration, ok.

Otherwise, hell no.

[mmonk]

11. Now now, we must be consistent.

;-)

[TheWraith]

7. I've seen too much bullshit thrown at Obama that just turned out to be bullshit to believe this.

Like how it was touted as fact that they were going to wait until after 2010 to repeal DADT, when in fact that was entirely speculation by one media outlet based on an offhand remark by somebody not even on the Obama team.

[eleny]

10. right - and why should we trust the ap these days

[Radical Activist]

19. the blogger assumes

a lot of things that aren't in the AP article in order to make his argument.

[eleny]

22. thx!

[Radical Activist]

18. A lot of speculation, extrapolation

and bait and switch was going on in that blog post. Yes, there has been too much of that going on that turned out to be bogus to take it with more than a grain of salt.

[mmonk]

8. Let them debate it all they want.

But they better restore it because it is the rule of the land according to the Constitution.

[Idealism]

9. Unequivocally wrong.

Torture produces suspect information, if any at all. It does nothing but put our troops and our citizens further at risk for retaliation. Abu Gharib mobilized thousands and thousands of radicals to join Al-Qaeda and other organizations bent on doing harm to Americans. It was the best recruitment drive ever for terrorism.

Obama said his administration does not/will not torture, and I pray he remembers his own words.

[margotb822]

12. So, after reading the AP story

I question the veracity of this reporting and wonder whether it's the AP "stirring the pot." It's classic non-reporting with unidentified sources and speculation...not of good quality or supported information.

[stillcool]

13. My thoughts are..

I'll be able to offer an opinion when I know what the proposal is.

The proposal Obama is considering would require all CIA interrogators to follow conduct outlined in the U.S. Army Field Manual, the officials said. The plans would also have the effect of shutting down secret "black site" prisons around the world where the CIA has questioned terror suspects — with all future interrogations taking place inside American military facilities.

However, Obama's changes may not be absolute. His advisers are considering adding a classified loophole to the rules that could allow the CIA to use some interrogation methods not specifically authorized by the Pentagon, the officials said. They said the intent is not to use that as an opening for possible use of waterboarding, an interrogation technique that simulates drowning.

The new rules would abandon a part of President George W. Bush's counterterrorism policy that has been condemned internationally. Bush has defended his policies by pointing to the fact that the nation has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on its soil.

Obama spokeswoman Brooke Anderson did not have an immediate comment Friday about the drafted plans, which the two officials discussed only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.

No final decisions have been made about how to adjust the government's interrogation standards. Obama is still weighing whether to alter interrogation policy by executive order during his first days in office or to work with Congress through legislation.

The plans do not specifically address the issue of extraordinary rendition, the policy of transferring foreign terrorism suspects to third countries without court approval.

In private Capitol Hill meetings, CIA Director nominee Leon Panetta and Director of National Intelligence designate Dennis Blair have said Obama wants a single set of rules for interrogations. And in Senate testimony Thursday, Attorney General nominee Eric Holder called the Army manual "a good place to start."

[mmonk]

14. Yes, we have to wait to find out.

I think we should still keep sadism illegal with no loopholes.

[stillcool]

16. I've read too many of these headlines..

to say what I think, of the some time in the future proposal that hasn't been written yet. I guess I don't take the bait that easily anymore.

[mmonk]

20. News is pretty unreliable these days.

I think illegal activity that the CIA does should remain illegal and not be codified and accepted in our laws. It's not like they didn't ever torture when it was illegal. But when you accept torture in the laws of your land, you are going down a dark and sometimes irreversible path.

[stillcool]

23. I don't get why they felt in necessary...

to legalize it at all. The CIA does all kinds of illegal shit, and it's not been a problem yet. Maybe every now and then when the public finds out there's a bit of a stink, but it doesn't change anything. If I'm not mistaken the FBI, and the military were also responsible for the torture. I think it was they, that requested that the interrogation techniques be covered by law.

[cherokeeprogressive]

15. Long ago, I stopped giving credence to any story that didn't include NAMES as sources.

"according to two U.S. officials familiar with drafts of the plans." What bullshit.

Red flag.

[originalpckelly]

21. That deep throat guy wasn't even talked about anonymously!

[cherokeeprogressive]

24. I think that's gotta be the best kept secret ever shared by two people. n/t

[justsomeguy1973]

17. If you spend your time getting upset over stories without real sources, you're being silly

There are no disclosed sources in this report. It's as good as citing trash you heard on a Fox News piece. Forget about it and wait for factual things to fret over.

Peace.

[stillcool]

25. Forgot to mention the real headline ..

of the article you posted:

Sources: Obama ready to ban harsh interrogations

By LARA JAKES and PAMELA HESS – 2 days ago

..and a <gasp> actual quote..

Holder on Thursday said the interrogation methods outlined in the Army manual would be just as effective as those used by the CIA.

"I'm not convinced at all that if we restrict ourselves to the Army field manual that we will be in any way less effective in the interrogation of people who have sworn to do us harm," Holder said.

[MessiahRp]

26. Well that's all great and dandy..

But it only counts if you ban ALL torture. There shouldn't even be a debate about this. If it's even close to borderline, back away...

I know the sourcing of the article is suspect, but since it is the AP we should at least take note of it.

I don't think there should be any ambiguity about this. All torture is illegal and should be off limits. This seems to go with the similar discussion, that said Obama was considering the shut down of Gitmo difficult and that his team was trying to come up with a separate court that would accept torture-driven confessions since regular courts would rule them inadmissible.

Here's that link: http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/oh-goody-constitutional-lawyer-white-

Now both reports could be erroneous, false, written with a slant and an agenda... or they could be true (certainly I doubt Obama's people would publicly admit such thinking)... either way I really hope against hope that all the hawks he's surrounding himself with haven't infiltrated his thinking to the point where this is even possibly on the table.

Rp

[mmonk]

27. Your hope is mine also.

[stillcool]

28. Oh.. by all means..

make something out of it.