|
|
The Underwear Bomber, the OPR Report, and TortureIt's hard to ignore the ongoing coverage of the underwear bomber and the TSA's new security regulations. We think Amy Davidson of The New Yorker's Close Read blog put it best, writing of the Christmas Day bombing attempt: It's a bit hard to follow the arguments Cheney et al. are making about how the near-miss over Detroit on Christmas Day shows that we really need to waterboard people and lock them up in places like Guantanamo. This is especially odd because, in the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, we seem to have had the raw intelligence we needed, and just didn't use it intelligently—it was more a failure of reading comprehension than information gathering. (It might also have helped to read his Facebook page.) We have an idea. Former FBI agent and ACLU national security policy counsel Mike German said in a statement today: We should be focusing on evidence-based, targeted and narrowly tailored investigations based on individualized suspicion, which would be both more consistent with our values and more effective than diverting resources to a system of mass suspicion. Overbroad policies such as racial profiling and invasive body scanning for all travelers not only violate our rights and values, they also waste valuable resources and divert attention from real threats. In times of hardship and ease, it is of utmost importance that we protect the values that make America great, and stay focused on upholding the rule of law. Which reminds us: where's that Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report? You know, the internal Justice Department watchdog report that criticizes the work of former Office of Legal Counsel lawyers and torture memo authors John Yoo, Steven Bradbury and Jay Bybee? Marcy Wheeler writes: [I]t has been 48 days since Eric Holder said the OPR Report on John Yoo and other OLC lawyers would be released by the end of November. And yet we still don't have that report. (BTW: Did anyone else find it shocking that John Yoo never even met former President Bush or former Vice President Cheney? We did.) Sometimes we need reminders about the importance of upholding the rule of law. Like this op-ed in today's New York Times about the Supreme Court's refusal to hear Rasul v. Rumsfeld, the case of four British citizens who challenged their detention at Guantánamo: [T]he rule of law rests on scrutinizing evidence of past behavior to establish accountability, confer justice and deter bad behavior in the future. Accountability. That rings a bell. Accountability for past actions that will prevent future abuses of power. It isn't too late: tell the DOJ you demand accountability for torture.
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 4 Responses to "The Underwear Bomber, the OPR Report, and Torture " |
|
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jan 5th, 2010 at 2:23pm
The Supreme Court has sold out to the
torturers.What a disgrace!
Jan 6th, 2010 at 12:03am
Underware bomber- may he be tortured to death - and you mongrels as well. You dreadful dogooder useless buch of no hoper losing bastards. May you all rot in hell. Stich all you Muslim lovers up your bum chum. No death is too good for them. Gees I hate you shitwits.
Jan 8th, 2010 at 1:15pm
Richard, it is nice to see the love that Christ preached repeated and reflected through the ages. Keep up the good work. It justifies my agnosticism.
Jan 10th, 2010 at 3:47am
Roald & Richard...you are both made of the same stuff. Keep your frickin religious & non-belief bs to yourselves. We would have a peaceful world if you would! Roald, your attack is as bad as if you were religious...jeezzz you can't even see it.