Feb 20th, 2009
Posted by Anthony D. Romero, ACLU at 1:37pm	National Security

Troubling signs from Obama's Administration

On his first day in office, President Obama moved our nation miles ahead on the road to restoring its fundamental values by signing executive orders to close Guantanamo, halt the military commissions and end torture.

The ACLU, like millions of people the world over, cheered. The orders were an important first step toward restoring an America we can be proud of again. But we're not there yet, and there are some troubling signs that can't be ignored.

Upon close reading, the executive orders contained worrisome ambiguities. While they halted the military commissions, they left open the possibility of their revival in some form. They also banned torture but left open the future possibility for the CIA to use interrogation techniques not found in the Army Field Manual, the basis for legal interrogations by the military.

Knowing that our freshly minted president put together these orders with lightning speed, we took cautious note, but remained hopeful that once clarification came, so would reassurance.

This was not the first cause for concern. There had been others, like the retention of Defense Secretary Robert Gates. We couldn't help but wonder whether the "new Gates" had experienced a Road to Damascus conversion and was capable of adopting the new president's ideals. Our worries intensified when John Brennan was appointed Deputy National Security Adviser after being shot down for CIA Director because of his problematic civil liberties record. But while we took cautious note of these appointments, we decided to leave speculation aside.

Then came some increasingly troubling developments.

On Feb. 4, the British High Court ordered that documentation of the torture and rendition of Guantanamo detainee Binyam Mohamed must remain secret — not because releasing it would endanger national security, but because of a "threat" made by the Bush administration that disclosure would endanger intelligence sharing between the U.S. and Britain. The High Court said it was "difficult to conceive that a democratically elected and accountable government could possibly have any rational objection to placing into the public domain such a summary of what its own officials reported as to how a detainee was treated by them and which made no disclosure of sensitive intelligence matters."

With the "threat" still in place, the Obama administration's reply, thanking the U.K. "for its continued commitment to protect sensitive national security information," spoke volumes. Not only did an administration that prides itself on transparency and accountability fail to condemn the withholding of information about an already well-publicized rendition program, but it applauded it without qualification.

Next was a Feb. 9 San Francisco federal court hearing in another case involving Mohamed in which he and four other rendition victims, represented by the ACLU, are suing a Boeing subsidiary for organizing the rendition flights that facilitated torture. A lower court threw out the lawsuit last year, indulging the Bush administration's improper use of the "state secrets" claim. Given Obama's stated commitment to transparency and opposition to torture and rendition, observers thought it was a given that his Justice Department would pull the plug on the over-broad state secrets claim in this case. Shockingly, a Justice Department lawyer stood up in court and fully adopted the Bush administration's position. To date, no torture victim has had his day in court.

Another cause for concern was the testimony of CIA Director Leon Panetta. At his confirmation hearing, Panetta cited the "ticking bomb" scenario, and left open the possibility that in certain circumstances the CIA could use abusive interrogation methods. He stated that agents who had committed torture, like waterboarding, will not be prosecuted if their actions were authorized by the Justice Department. In fact, Obama's Justice Department has yet to release critical memos believed to have authorized those actions under President Bush.

And just last week, Obama's choice for solicitor general, Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan, said she believes the government can hold suspected terrorists without trial.

We need President Obama to reassure Americans that these troubling signs are not indications that he's willing to compromise our fundamental principles. He must permanently end the flawed military commissions that allow evidence gleaned from torture, hearsay and coercion and are an assault on due process and the rule of law. These proceedings cannot be "modified" or "improved" — they must be scrapped — as in R.I.P.

Obama must ignore any advice from "split-the baby" advisers that encourage him to "retrofit" our established legal system to assure a certain outcome in admittedly difficult terrorism cases. And his administration should also stop defending the Supreme Court case of ACLU client Ali Al-Marri, in which the Bush administration claimed the extraordinary power to declare anybody it chooses, even U.S. citizens, "enemy combatants" and hold them indefinitely on U.S. soil.

Finally, President Obama must unequivocally commit to pursuing accountability for those who have authorized torture and other crimes. While his desire to move forward is understandable and necessary, it cannot be at the expense of upholding the law, which no one — not even the highest government officials — is above. Our government doesn't get to turn society's other cheek to admissions of torture and violations of law, especially when they come from officials like Guantanamo Convening Authority, Susan Crawford.

The full truth of the torture and abuse of the Bush administration will inevitably see the light of day whether it is in a month, a year or a century; the truth is always known in our America. But President Obama should not mar his historic legacy by colluding with the Bush abusers or by failing to demand accountability for the most egregious human rights violations perpetrated by any administration. A full investigation must be conducted, and if warranted, prosecutions carried out.

The ACLU remains hopeful that change has finally arrived. But restoring an America we can be proud of again cannot be done with half-steps, incomplete gestures or hesitancy. Hope realized is too hard won, and too easily lost.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune News Service on Feb. 19, 2009

Permalink |	National Security

Tags: Close Guantanamo, national security project

1. Paen Says:
   Feb 20th, 2009 at 2:17pm

   It is time to remind Obama that torture is a War Crime!

2. Vic Livingston Says:
   Feb 20th, 2009 at 5:25pm

   (ACLU: Please use this version of submitted post)

   Kudos to Mr. Romero for sounding an early warning.

   As FDR once said to a visitor appealing for action on a particular issue:

   "You have convinced me. I want to do it. Now MAKE me do it."

   Thanks to ACLU for the recognition that rhetoric alone cannot right the wrongs -- crimes against humanity -- that have been committed over the past eight years in the name of "keeping America safe."

   My concern is that Mr. Obama, like most ambitious politicians, likes the feel of power, and thus may leave himself exposed to highly sophisticated efforts at conditioning his responses, thoughts and policy positions... perhaps by some of those who are closest to him day-to-day.

   Please see:

   http://www.nowpublic.com/world/shadow-government-shackles- obama-torture
   http://www.nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-ne twork-targets-terrorizes-u-s-citizens

3. Stephen Bickford Says:
   Feb 20th, 2009 at 6:58pm

   If Obama doesn't investigate torture and punish those who have broken the laws then he condones torture and that is illegal too, in my understanding.

4. Quidpro Says:
   Feb 20th, 2009 at 8:46pm

   TROUBLING SIGNS FROM THE ACLU

   First this post makes repeated references to incidences of "torture" committed by the former administration. Since I have been rather busy over the past few months, I may have missed the news reports where these judicial determinations were made. Please cite the case where a court found former administrative officials to have engaged in, or authorized, torture.

   Then, I read that waterboarding is torture. Please advise when this determination was made and by whom. Congress, which was controlled by the Democrats since 2006, could have banned such a technique. If it did, this was another development I missed.

   One would think that the ACLU, of all orgsanizations, would be careful in making accusations of criminal conduct. Pray (if I may use such a term) that it has not abandonned that hallmark of civil liberties (and constitutional protections), that one is innocent until proven guilty.

   As Mr. Romero's post states, the truth is always (eventually) known in America. The ACLU should not mar its historic self-proclaimed role as guardian of constitutional rights and civil liberties. It should accord to the officials of the previous administration the presumption of innocence that it insists be accorded to those actually accused of crimes

5. Woody in Vestal NY Says:
   Feb 20th, 2009 at 9:15pm

   The expectations the ACLU placed in the Obama administration have been misplaced.
   Mr Obama has now adopted the Bush admin views on oversea's prisons and prisoners.
   Mr Obama is a known "expert" on Constitutional law,and I believe he has formulated plans to subvert most if not all of the Constitution.
   He now begins to offer vailed threats to those that differ from his views. I really am afraid of what he will attempt to do. Just by reading some of the paperwork from the Joyce Foundation He helped direct, I can see his general viewpoint and it isn't mine.

6. Anonymous Says:
   Feb 20th, 2009 at 10:15pm

   Your words
   Nondiscriminatory funding would simply place the profoundly personal decision about how to treat a pregnancy back where it belongs -- in the hands of the woman who must live with the consequences of that decision.

   Should have thought of those consequences before she got pregnant.
   If she carries the baby to term then it is obviously NOT a health issue, it's a don't want to live wiht the consequence. If you can carry the baby to term give a family and a baby a chance for life........

7. Jeff Says:
   Feb 21st, 2009 at 6:53am

   Pouring water down the nose of someone who would otherwise gladly go out into a group of innocent civilians with a bomb strapped to their body is not torture. There is no long-lasting sequela from this - other than possibly obtianing information that can save the lives of innocent Americans. GITMO detainees meals are in compliance with their religious constraints. They are regularly given exercise and medical examinations. Orange cones are put in the hallways at their prayer times so the staff will respect their desire for quiet. If we let these people go, who wants them as their neighbor? Mr. Romero? I don't. Do we want them to return to their country to resume their terrorist activites? You guys and gals at the ACLU need to get a life.
   These terrorists do not play by the rules, and I believe that most people feel that they have no right to have the same Constitutional privileges that a law-abiding citizen of American does.

8. Hawaiian style Says:
   Feb 21st, 2009 at 1:00pm

   The more things change the more they stay the same.

   Fear of being blamed for a future attack on the US seems to remove convictions. It would take a strong President to say that preserving the Constitution and our World leadership in Democracy is worth more than a chance that some Americans will lose their lives.

   In realty however, our troops are fighting and dying to preserve democracy. Why do our citizens feel they are exempt from doing the same if absolutely necessary.

   We always hear politicians say we have to do something or other, "for our children." Would not preserving the Constitution be the best thing we could preserve for them? Would not showing them an example of courage where ALL citizens demonstrate the willingness and the duty to fight for the Constitution whether on the battle field or politically be the best legacy, and the best gift we could give them?

9. Jupp Says:
   Feb 21st, 2009 at 9:46pm

   Just doubled my pledge to the ACLU so we get these war criminals behind bars.

10. AYM68 Says:
    Feb 21st, 2009 at 10:42pm

    Its time to remind obama that we need to stay a secure nation- and that our safety does trump out our opponents rights.

11. Vic Livingston Says:
    Feb 23rd, 2009 at 12:39am

    THE FOLLOWING COMMENT GENERATED A 'HELD FOR BLOG OWNER' MESSAGE WHEN THE WRITER ATTEMPTED TO POST TO THE WASHINGTON POST'S 'THE FIX' POLITICAL BLOG (2/23/09).

    THE WASHINGTON POST DOES NOT 'HOLD' POSTS UNLESS FOUL LANGUAGE WAS USED.

    HERE IS THE POST THAT GENERATED APPARENT UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRIOR RESTRAINT ON THE PART OF GOVERNMENT 'FUSION CENTER' CENSORS:

    ***************************************

    TEAM OBAMA, SEN. LEAHY AND CONGRESS:

    YOU MUST IMMEDIATE DISMANTLE THE ONGOING BUSH-CHENEY EXTRAJUDICIAL PUNISHMENT NETWORK...

    COVERTLY TORTURING/SLOW-KILLING AMERICAN CITIZENS NATIONWIDE WITH SILENT RADIATION WEAPONRY.

    "Untold thousands of Americans are being tortured and slow-killed by silent, hand-held radiation weaponry approved and deployed by their government and put into the hands of federal agents, local law enforcement and a nationwide network of citizen vigilantes -- a 21st century genocide that, in terms of scope and effect, makes the abuses of several hundred at Guantanamo look like detention hall."

    http://www.nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-v igilante-network-targets-terrorizes-u-s-citizens
    http://www.nowpublic.com/world/domestic-torture-radiation-weaponry- americas-horrific-shame
    http://www.nowpublic.com/world/targeting-u-s-citizens-govt-agencies -root-cause-wall-street-financial-crisis

    OR (if links are disabled by desperate rogues and disinformation agents who have threatened and disparaged this journalist):

    http://www.NowPublic.com/scrivener

    TIP FOR BOB WOODWARD AND WAPO INVESTIGATIVE UNIT (IF MORIBUND, PLEASE ACTIVATE):

    What you know about "directed energy weapons" deployed in Iraq has served as a template for a covert, ideologically-motivated campaign of hi-tech genocide in America.

    Good people inside the FBI who have been silenced for years are sick over this.

    Talk to them -- now, so that this horror might end.

12. healingsgreen Says:
    Feb 23rd, 2009 at 1:59pm

    The slavery issue in US history, ultimately, was without compromise. There was no middle position between advocates of slavery and advocates of abolition of slavery. Like the slavery issue there can be no middle ground about habeas corpus rights in our culture since Runnymede and the Magna Charta and living without those rights. Compromise is logically and practically impossible between the two positions.
    The legal thinking that has led to US criminal abuse of "detainees" is very much like that which created the Salem Witch Trials of 1692. The legal thinking then also applied torture to encourage the accused to confess to their crimes of witchcraft. One has only to substitute the word "witch" for "unlawful combatant" to see the absurdity of the Bush-Obama legal positions.
    The task of returning this country to a republic from a nearly legal dictatorship will be challenging in the extreme. We will have to have the courage of Gandhi to never bow our heads before injustice in this task.

    Bruce Wm Sargent
    Montpelier VT

13. lokywoky Says:
    Feb 24th, 2009 at 1:46am

    quidpro:
    That waterboarding is torture was determined to be so back in the Inquisition. It was determined to be so during WWII, and as a result the Geneva Conventions prohibiting torture including waterboarding.

    The United States determined that some of OUR OWN soldiers committed waterboarding against Vietnamese soldiers. OUR OWN soldiers were prosecuted, and convicted of war crimes.

    And not just six months ago, the US prosecuted a Liberian military man for among other things, waterboarding someone, under the terms of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

    The United States is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions - it is a treaty that was ratified by the US Senate. And according to our Constitution, that means it becomes the law of OUR land - with equal weight to the constitution.

    So your argument that you 'missed something' about waterboarding being declared torture - you haven't read your history.

    And further - just ask John McCain if he thinks waterboarding is not torture - since that was one of the techniques used against him during his time as a POW. He pointedly states that he gave the NVN guards false information in an effort to get them to stop.

    Torture does not produce good results. People being tortured will say anything to get you to stop. And yes - they lie!

    There have now been at least three JAG lawyers who were assigned as judges for the Gitmo detainees who have quit the military because of the abuses. And one said the reason was that the case in front of her was so aggregious because the defendant 'had been tortured'.

    Have you been under a rock someplace for the last 8 years? Apparently so.

14. healingsgreen Says:
    Feb 25th, 2009 at 10:56am

    "And that is why I can stand here tonight and say without exception or equivocation that the United States of America does not torture."
    President Barack Obama, Speech February 24, 2009

    Listening while remembering the image of the tortured man on the floor, his blood in the foreground, at Bagram Prison creates disjointed reality. There is a sense of denial in what I am hearing. There is a sense of a lie in what I am hearing. The truth cannot be spun away from the honest. Without acknowledgement of the violation the life of the violation continues.

    I am reminded of a phrase from a performance of Bread and Puppets that equated our "Democracy" with "De More Crazy".
    There is insanity in a family living in denial of the incest rape that is occurring. There is insanity in a country living in denial of the torture that is occurring. The incest rape is a family secret, that every family member knows. The torture is a state secret that every citizen knows.

    So,
    "The entire claim of “state secrets” in this case (Mohamed v. Jeppesen) is based on two sworn Declarations from CIA Director Michael Hayden - one public and one filed secretly with the court. In them, Hayden argues that courts cannot adjudicate this case because to do so would be to disclose and thus degrade key CIA programs of rendition and interrogation - the very policies which Obama, in his first week in office, ordered shall no longer exist. How, then, could continuation of this case possibly jeopardize national security when the rendition and interrogation practices which gave rise to these lawsuits are the very ones that the U.S. Government, under the new administration, claims to have banned? " Glenn Greenwald

    Because, Glenn, the USA is a "De-More-Crazy." The USA is now a highly dysfunctional family in which our leaders cannot speak truth for fear of the whole thing blowing apart.

    In the moment, I can see only one way through this and that is to get the cases before the courts. There is no hope of change coming from the Obama administration. The reasons for this don't matter. Change must occur judicially for the changes to be significant and the positions of the Bush administration and now Obama administration to be rolled back. That is the only real way to clean up this mess and create lasting and functional change.
    So do you want to do the hard, difficult, patient, costly work of getting these ideas before the courts or do you want to live in a functional dictatorship? Which one makes more sense? The ACLU may be our only hope of keeping this family going. If you love your country, donate freely.

15. Todd Armstrong Says:
    Feb 25th, 2009 at 1:20pm

    These are (some of) societal foundations:
    - banking (credit - liquidity)
    - auto (manufacturing base)
    - bridges, tunnels, internet or infrastructure (as per stimulus)

    The most fundamental is the upholding the Constitution and civil rights around globe.

    There can be no sound industry nor infrastructure without the practice of law.

16. Johnn Says:
    Feb 25th, 2009 at 8:46pm

    Quidpro, do you really, seriously question that something happened just because you didn't see it on the news?

17. me Says:
    Feb 26th, 2009 at 1:56pm

    jupp
    you're an idiot with too much money!

18. Ron Says:
    Feb 26th, 2009 at 9:47pm

    I'm all for free speak, but why publish anonymous comments from obvious trolls? They don't contribute to the discussion:
    # me Says:
    February 26th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    jupp
    you’re an idiot with too much money!

19. Doric Says:
    Feb 27th, 2009 at 10:01am

    The phrases in Barack Obama’s inauguration speech that have evoked the greatest enthusiasm across the political spectrum of the US establishment, from the Republican right to liberal Democrats, were those suggesting that the American people are responsible for the present economic catastrophe. “Our economy is badly weakened,” he declared, “a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.”

    Precisely what those “hard choices” are Obama did not specify, but he made clear they in no way involve a challenge to the capitalist market system, declaring that “its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched.”

    He broadly hinted that the “hard choices” he would make involve sweeping cuts in social programs, including ending programs that don’t’ “work.” This policy of austerity, which, as he had previously indicated, would include cuts in bedrock programs such as Social Security and Medicare, was summed up in his call for “a new era of responsibility.”

    The implicit demand for greater sacrifice from the American people was hailed by liberal commentators such as the Washington Post’s David Ignatius, who praised Obama for telling the people that the crisis was “partly our fault.” He continued, “We all know the Pogo line about how ‘we have met the enemy, and he is us.’ Obama implicitly seemed to embrace it.”

    Right-wing columnist George Will in his Washington Post op-ed piece enthused over the same lines, writing that one of Obama’s themes “was that Americans do not just have a problem, they are a problem.”

    These approving comments accurately sum up the deeply reactionary and deceitful thrust of Obama’s speech, behind its “I feel your pain” rhetoric. Obama’s attempt to foist the blame for the failure of American capitalism on the American people is nothing short of a libel, the purpose of which is to obscure those social interests that are really responsible for the unfolding catastrophe and justify even deeper attacks on the working class.

    The working class bears no responsibility for the collapse of the financial system and the resulting recession that is developing into a full-scale depression. Working people have no control over the policies and actions of the multimillionaires and billionaires who bestride Wall Street. They had no say in concocting the Ponzi schemes that generated multimillion-dollar compensation packages and colossal personal fortunes for the financial aristocracy until they collapsed, as they were bound to.

    Working people are the victims of the maniacal greed of the corporate-financial elite, which itself is an expression of fundamental contradictions within the irrational economic system over which they preside. One would think from Obama’s remarks that the broad masses of people in the US have been living the good life. In reality, for three solid decades they have seen their social position decline and their living standards deteriorate as an ever-greater share of the national wealth was funneled into the bank accounts of the ruling elite.

    The single most significant feature of American life—the staggering growth of social inequality—went without mention in Obama’s speech. He could not allude to it and at the same time accuse the people of bearing “collective” guilt.

    Obama’s single fleeting reference to corporate criminality—“greed and irresponsibility on the part of some”—was itself a cover-up. On the part of “some”? The virtual collapse of the US and global economy is not the result of a few bad apples or mere aberrational behavior. Fraud, incompetence, recklessness were—and remain—pervasive and systemic in American capitalism.

    This is a system that for decades has starved and dismantled basic industry, allowed the social infrastructure to rot and driven down the living standards of the majority of the population in order to generate higher profits for the elite from financial manipulation and speculation. The American ruling class stands exposed and disgraced before the world as a semi-criminal social layer.

    Obama’s “new era of responsibility” signifies, in reality, a general amnesty for the system, the class and those in government who are truly responsible for the crisis. None of the bankers and speculators who created a mountain of paper values on the basis of predatory home loans that were bound to fail are to be held accountable. Nor are the government regulators who ran interference and served as their accomplices. Likewise, the congressmen of both parties who dismantled regulations and slashed corporate taxes in exchange for campaign funds and other bribes.

    To name a few names:

    • New York Senator Charles Schumer, Democratic chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, who raised $12, 928,000 in the 2003-2008 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CPR). His top five industries for campaign cash were securities and investment, lawyers and law firms, real estate, miscellaneous finance and commercial banks, from which he netted a total of $3,937,000. His top five contributing firms were Citigroup, UBS, Weiss et al, Kosowitz, Benson et al and Metlife, which funneled a total of $271,000 to his campaigns.

    As head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee for the last four years, Schumer has increased donations from Wall Street by 50 percent. Has raked in over $120 million from Wall Street in recent years.

    • Barney Frank, Democratic chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. He raised $2,282,000 in 2007-2008, according to CPR, with his top five contributing industries consisting of securities and investment, real estate, insurance, lawyers and law firms and commercial banks.

    • Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s White House chief of staff. After leaving the Clinton administration, he netted $18 million in the three years he was employed by the global investment banking firm of Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein in Chicago, where he worked from 1999 to 2002.

    Then there is Obama himself. A product of the Illinois Democratic Party machine, tied in with financial moguls such as Robert Wolf, CEO of UBS America, and Warren Buffett, the wealthiest individual in the US, the recipient of hundreds of millions of dollars in corporate campaign funds and himself a multimillionaire, he personifies the social corruption of the ruling elite in general and the rightward movement of the Democratic Party in particular. His ascendance is the outcome of the turn to identity politics and racial preferences as a means of integrating the black upper-middle-class into the political establishment and suppressing the fundamental class issues in American society.

    The prerequisite for establishing genuine “responsibility” is for the working class to demand a full and public accounting for the plundering of the economy and the social misery it has produced. This must include serious investigations of the role of bankers, hedge fund managers, speculators and their accomplices in government and facilitators in the corporate media.

    The entire economic and political system must be put on trial, and criminal prosecutions pursued against the main offenders. The fortunes amassed from fraud and swindling must be seized and the wealth stolen from the American people recovered. Such a public accounting is essential to developing a rational and progressive solution to the crisis.

20. Quidpro Says:
    Feb 27th, 2009 at 3:55pm

    Lokywoky:

    You claim the Geneva Convention prohibits waterboarding. Did you actually read it? It prohibits torture, but it does not define torture. Our debate is whether "waterboarding" is torture.

    I well understand that some people believe it to be so. But my point, which you failed to refute, was that neither Congress nor the courts expressly prohibited that interrogation procedure. Thus, the ACLU, by acting in a manner which assumes the guilt of prior administration representatives for engaging in or advocating actions never declared illegal, violates its own fundamental principles.

21. healingsgreen Says:
    Feb 28th, 2009 at 10:57am

    Someone who is a lawyer help me with this: If Bush done something "illegal", doesn't it have to be tested in court to be reversed? If Obama didn't make the Bush claims won't the Bush action remain in place as a precedent for some future president to use any way, even if Obama declared the act illegal and said that he wasn't going to do it? Isn't what is key here to have the issues brought before the courts? And isn't it true that if the courts find the action illegal, then and only then we can say that the position has been reversed? Am I right or wrong here?
    I can see that maintaining the Bush positions is to Obama's political advantage as well. It appears that he is supporting extremely right positions. He can't really give to the us anything that we can't take in court anyway. So let's take it.

Name

E-mail

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Homepage

• Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
• Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

What code is in the image? *

Enter the characters shown in the image. Ignore spaces and be careful about upper and lower case.