Sunday, February 15, 2009

Torture Report Erodes Bush's Defense

By Jason Leopold
February 15, 2009

A key line in George W. Bush’s defense against war crimes charges has weakened with the disclosure that an internal Justice Department watchdog has concluded that the legal advice, which cleared the way for Bush’s policies on torture and other abuse of detainees, was tainted by political influence.

Read on.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

About time the world and decent Americans saw a President nailed for encouraging torture. Vietnames were tortured by Americans and worse - thrown from planes and dragged behind tanks.
Torture has been taught to Latin American trainees at Fort Benning's School of the Amricas. Iraq and Afghanistan were places it was more difficult to get away with it being it was done to civilians, even women en mass. Redition, that fancy word for capturing someone anywhere and sending them to be tortured, was truly clever they thought.
Jay Janson

Old Billy said...

Disbarment is not the only mitigation that can be offered for Yoo. Yoo was clearly an advocate for administration policy, but not like a defense attorney. Yoo wrote his opinions to enable crimes and as a means to establish a defense if those crimes were to be examined (i.e. well OLC said it was legal...) As such, Yoo conspired to commit torture (even to death in some cases). Even without any other offenses, these meetings alone prove conspiracy on the part of Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Yoo, Addington, and Bybee. And let's not forget obstruction by Mukasey.

Anonymous said...

If we can't hang our own leaders when they commit war crimes or torture we have no moral athority to either tell others too, or to peruse others who commit international crimes.

What does this mean? If we cannot investigate and try our own criminals, then we have no moral athority to chase Sadam or Osama Ben Lardin.

carrie said...

I really hope someone nominates Mr. Leopold for an award for all of his reporting on torture. He deserves it.