« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
What Did Cheney Mean That Obama Has Reserved Right To Torture?
We were struck by one excerpt from Cheney's speech:
This might explain why President Obama has reserved unto himself the right to order the use of enhanced interrogation should he deem it appropriate. What value remains to that authority is debatable, given that the enemy now knows exactly what interrogation methods to train against, and which ones not to worry about. Yet having reserved for himself the authority to order enhanced interrogation after an emergency, you would think that President Obama would be less disdainful of what his predecessor authorized after 9/11. It's almost gone unnoticed that the president has retained the power to order the same methods in the same circumstances. When they talk about interrogations, he and his administration speak as if they have resolved some great moral dilemma in how to extract critical information from terrorists. Instead they have put the decision off, while assigning a presumption of moral superiority to any decision they make in the future.
What is the former veep talking about there? Where has Obama reserved himself the right to order enhanced interrogation techniques?
Could Cheney have been basing that on recent comments by Senator Kit Bond, played up in a recent New Republic story?
But this week, in announcing his plans to vote to confirm Panetta, Republican Senator Kit Bond said that he was supporting the nominee in part because he had "committed to ... exploring the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on high-value detainees that may warrant going beyond the Army Field Manual in certain situations."
Did Cheney take that nugget of information conveyed by Bond about Panetta, and use it to spin a whole paragraph about Obama reserving the right to order such techniques? It's unclear, but we wouldn't put it past him.
If you have other ideas as to what Cheney was talking about there, let us know in comments.
Advertisement
Josh
Zachary
If the President "ordered" (Obama's words) that we should not use torture, he can un-order it. So it is true that he retains the right to reinstate the EITs until something external stops him.
Pretty simple: until each EIT is either explicitly outlawed by legislation (you are going to need legislation for this), or determined point by point to be illegal under existing statutes to be illegal (you are going to need court actions/prosecutions for this), then they exist as things the president can prohibit or un-prohibit, on his signature.
May be the only point in the entire speech where Cheney is correct....but it points out why Obama's "look forward" position is plainly inadequate to end the US's position in the world as a torture regime.
May 21, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
You were doing fine until the end. Obama's position in not inadequate, it is just what the doctor ordered.
And it is clear that at least many EITs are not torture, regardless of whether they are effective or ineffective. This does not make them legal, there may be other laws which restrict what can be done with a prisoner or detainee.
May 21, 2009 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama did say this:
"If and when we determine that the United States must hold individuals to keep them from carrying out an act of war, we will do so within a system that involves judicial and congressional oversight."
Perhaps Cheney has simply chosen to interpret this as including deciding to torture. I mean, "enhanced interrogation techniques."
I don't see it, but perhaps he does. Or thinks he does.
May 21, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are we parsing his bullshit, as if it contains some nugget of truth?
May 21, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I previously mentioned, this should and/or may assist to concerns of fromer VP Dick Cheney Torture Comments as mentioned as a concern within this Article.
--------------------------------------------------
Too briefly and in recalling the recent week long PBS Television Documentary, World War II and in direct reference to Stalin and as more than 27 Million perished (died) that Stalin deceased in FULL ACCOMMODATION OF STATE POWER and as suggested as an un-prosecuted War Criminal and now known fabricated and false evidence at the HAGUE WAR CRIMES TRIBUNALS.
I would assume there is and continues to be a World recognized view that WAR CRIMES AND PRESUMABLY INCLUDING ILLEGAL WARS WOULD BE TRIED IN THE HAGUE (ALSO) AND (ALSO) CRIMINALS WOULD BE TRIED DOMESTICALLY FOR DOMESTIC ILLEGAL ALLEGED CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS.
Todays President Obama and Dick Cheney Speeches are to some extent seemingly the 'SAME PACK OF LIES' as these policies, practices and procedures continue as Media has broadcast and are identical and/or similar to the former Bush Administration and also have gone un-prosecuted to this day, seemingly and/or alleged such as,
1) Torture, 2) illegal or false Rendition ecetra , 3) illegal, fabricated and/or false Detention ecetra, As suggested, Possibly Murder 3) Illegal wire taps and disregard of FISA Laws and Courts, 4) seemingly and/or alleged Enormous Financial Fraud continues with Waste and Abuse (Single payer health care off the table all middle-person other Insurance, rating ecerta Agencies are in full force, 5) Kangaroo or false courts (Traffic, ecetra) 6) Illegal State Secrets (seemingly and/or alleged excluded, fabricated, falsified ecetra evidence) and many other alleged concerns or crimes of fraud, waste and abuse.
Enough for now.
As an additional repeated mention and suggestion, hopefully President Obama will immediately apply the 'Change We Can Believe In' with;
1) Immediately end the enactment of the 'Death Penalty' no excuses!!
2) Immediate support towards proper and forthright subpoenas, prosecutions ecetra, as warranted.
3) Consideration for a $200 Billion Dollar allotment directly to the wages of new Federal, State, County, City Governments to create 22.2 Million Jobs at $9.00 Dollars an hour.
Thank you for your time and consideration
May 21, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Many believe that there is a clause in the Army Manual that still allows shady areas of interrogation. That is what Cheney was referring to.
May 21, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
"What value remains to that authority is debatable, given that the enemy now knows exactly what interrogation methods to train against, and which ones not to worry about."
What a crock! It's amazing how a terrorist who did not have this information managed to be waterboarded 6 times a day for a month and still resisted giving up any worthwhile info. It's a bullshit argument and no one ever seems to call him out on it.
May 21, 2009 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The meme is that Obama will flip-flop on EIT.
May 21, 2009 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who let all these libs out of the day care center?
Cheney irritates you because he acts like an adult and refuses to indulge your infantile, quasi-christian nihilism. Take your moral indignation and go play in the sand box. We have a war to fight against the most ruthless fanatics we've ever faced since WWII. Grow up!
May 21, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the way to behave like "adults" is to resort to the kinds of unsophisticated, third-world bullying tactics that only the dumbest, most anti-social playground thugs still consider to be effective?
Years of refining and perfecting the techniques of counterinsurgency warfare and battlefield interrogation should all be thrown out the window and replaced with "an eye for an eye," and "might makes right"?
Yeah. That sounds like the "adult" thing to do. Jesus christ, I hope you don't ever have kids and teach them morally bankrupt crap like that.
What moral cowards and willful idiots you self-proclaimed tough guy types are. So afraid you might be too dumb and insensitive to contribute anything of real value to the modern world that you're busily working to drag it back down into the dark ages, so you can sit at the top of the pecking order again. Disgusting. As a parent, your attitude disgusts me and makes me fear for the future of my country.
May 21, 2009 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
A "truth commission" should be convened every time Cheney opens his mouth. The man is -- and I don't say this cavalierly -- evil.
May 21, 2009 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems that Cheney is referring to this decision by Obama to leave the door open to interrogation techniques that would be otherwise barred by the Army Field Manual.
See this NPR report, specifically the section under the header "A Possible Loophole."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99790782
May 21, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Gator Head. The not-really-a-"loophole" referred to there is that the Exec Order established a task force (gasp!) "to review interrogation and transfer policies." The task force is to report back w/i 180. Days, that is. Bringing it to late July.
There is no legit way for Cheney to spin that into Obama "reserv(ing) unto himself". What a surprise that the XVP said that. (Of course, I welcome him - or Liz - clarifying if he was referring to something else.)
Here's the relevant part of the Executive Order. (The rest is also short enough to read, if you're interested.)http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/
Sec. 5. Special Interagency Task Force on Interrogation and Transfer Policies.
(a) Establishment of Special Interagency Task Force. There shall be established a Special Task Force on Interrogation and Transfer Policies (Special Task Force) to review interrogation and transfer policies.
(b) Membership. The Special Task Force shall consist of the following members, or their designees:
(i) the Attorney General, who shall serve as Chair;
(ii) the Director of National Intelligence, who shall serve as Co-Vice-Chair;
(iii) the Secretary of Defense, who shall serve as Co-Vice-Chair;
(iv) the Secretary of State;
(v) the Secretary of Homeland Security;
(vi) the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency;
(vii) the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and
(viii) other officers or full-time or permanent part time employees of the United States, as determined by the Chair, with the concurrence of the head of the department or agency concerned.
(c) Staff. The Chair may designate officers and employees within the Department of Justice to serve as staff to support the Special Task Force. At the request of the Chair, officers and employees from other departments or agencies may serve on the Special Task Force with the concurrence of the head of the department or agency that employ such individuals. Such staff must be officers or full-time or permanent part-time employees of the United States. The Chair shall designate an officer or employee of the Department of Justice to serve as the Executive Secretary of the Special Task Force.
(d) Operation. The Chair shall convene meetings of the Special Task Force, determine its agenda, and direct its work. The Chair may establish and direct subgroups of the Special Task Force, consisting exclusively of members of the Special Task Force, to deal with particular subjects.
(e) Mission. The mission of the Special Task Force shall be:
(i) to study and evaluate whether the interrogation practices and techniques in Army Field Manual 2 22.3, when employed by departments or agencies outside the military, provide an appropriate means of acquiring the intelligence necessary to protect the Nation, and, if warranted, to recommend any additional or different guidance for other departments or agencies; and
(ii) to study and evaluate the practices of transferring individuals to other nations in order to ensure that such practices comply with the domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States and do not result in the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control.
(f) Administration. The Special Task Force shall be established for administrative purposes within the Department of Justice and the Department of Justice shall, to
the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, provide administrative support and funding for the Special Task Force.
(g) Recommendations. The Special Task Force shall provide a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Counsel to the President, on the matters set forth in subsection (d) within 180 days of the date of this order, unless the Chair determines that an extension is necessary.
(h) Termination. The Chair shall terminate the Special Task Force upon the completion of its duties.
May 21, 2009 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
When we saw how Bush/Cheney reacted to the events of 9/11, it became possible to say, "The terrorists won." Now that we see how the Obama administration is dealing with the Bush/Cheney reaction to 9/11, it is possible to say that, on election day last November, Bush/Cheney won. As long as Obama supports the Bush argument that invocation of the state secrets defense precludes the judiciary from allowing torture victims their day in court; as long as he threatens that Britain will get no intelligence from the US if one of its own citizens whom we tortured is allowed his day in court; as long as detainees at Bagram are refused habeas corpus rights; as long as Obama politicizes the Justice Department by flatly stating that CIA torturers will not be prosecuted (and claiming that the crimes at Abu Ghraib were the result of a few bad apples who have been properly punished); as long as he keeps claiming that even investigating the architects of the torture program is just mean-spirited "retribution"; as long as he maintains the fantasy that "preventive detention" is an option in this country and that military tribunals can work; as long as he hides photographs of torture on the grounds that publicizing them is more dangerous than the torture itself; until Obama changes all of this, I think it is not unreasonable of Cheney to assert that Obama has reserved for himself the right to torture. That right will be abolished only when the truth comes out, and Obama is fighting tooth and nail against the truth.
May 21, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
As this blog comment reply seemingly is applicable to a blog comment response and/or reply,
I will mention in response that Hopefully our US Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of our US Government will 'review and consider' any and all proper and forthright endeavors that would be presumable and/or applicable to be addressed for further review and consideration and therefore, if necessary and as proper and forthrightly applicable apply the proper and forthright US Constitution, Bill of Rights and within our Declaration(s) (As may be applicable, Treaties, Laws, Rules and Regulations thereof, and as applicable) of Independence with Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for All and endeavors thereof, to endeavor and/or apply the applicable, proper and forthright, US Constitution, Bill of Rights and within our Declaration(s) of Independence, procedures and applications thereof towards the Transparency, Oversight and Accountability, as applicalbe and/or necessary and as proper and forthrightly applicable within our mandates and towards the proper and forthright solutions, resolves and endeavors thereof.
May 22, 2009 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
"What value remains to that authority is debatable, given that the enemy now knows exactly what interrogation methods to train against, and which ones not to worry about."
I think Cheney is right, in a tiny way. Given that the most "effective" technique, waterboarding, had been talked about publicly for a long time, and given how ineffective most techniques seems to have been, it's hard to see what value they really had in the first place.
"Yet having reserved for himself the authority to order enhanced interrogation after an emergency, you would think that President Obama would be less disdainful of what his predecessor authorized after 9/11."
Has Obama been "disdainful"? Rather he's rejected outright in a calm and rational fashion. What Cheney is describing is ironically Cheney's false pride as seen in the mirror.
dis⋅dain
–verb (used with object)
1. to look upon or treat with contempt; despise; scorn.
2. to think unworthy of notice, response, etc.; consider beneath oneself: to disdain replying to an insult.
–noun
3. a feeling of contempt for anything regarded as unworthy; haughty contempt; scorn.
May 21, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The fact is, right after 9/11, torture was used to get the few legitimate Al-Qaeda connected fighters we apprehended to point their fingers indiscriminately at others, so the administration would be able to fill the headlines with reports of progress in the war on terror.
Of course, any real hardened terrorist would have been trained to use this opportunity to score serious propaganda points for their side, by pointing their fingers at local civilians, rope-a-doping military and intelligence officials into launching heavily armed raids into small unsophisticated villages, only to capture completely innocent members of the community.
That's the kind of tactic terrorists use to wage the battle for hearts and minds against their enemies and to fight back against a more powerful nation's superior firepower: by goading the superior force into acts of excessive aggression that make them look like brutally oppressive thugs. Thanks to the ham-fisted and ultimately naive tough guy mind-set of Cheney and his apologists, that's why we find the nation in the difficult position it's in today.
May 21, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's dispose of one widespread myth right away: no matter what Dick Cheney and his ilk may say, you cannot "train" anyone to resist torture. Even the (in)famous SERE program does not teach any techniques that can lessen a detainee's chances of breaking. The ability to resist "EITs" is entirely individual. Some personalities can resist even to the death (as many witnesses tortured in eighth-century French judicial proceedings did), while some will lie to stop the pain and others will disclose truthful information after very little forceful persuasion. I take as my authority Darius Rejali, the foremost academic expert on torture today, whose book TORTURE AND DEMOCRACY, published in 2007, is based on more than ten years of intensive historical and comparative research. Why speculate about Cheney's self-serving rants when solid facts are available?
May 21, 2009 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I take as my authority Darius Rejali, the foremost academic expert on torture today
Oh, I see, you're making an appeal to the the authority of Darius Rejali, eh? Well, I'm sold.
Except I didn't say anything about anyone being "trained to resist" torture. You don't have to be trained to resist anything to lie through your teeth. And there are plenty of other authorities who dispute that torture can ever reliably produce accurate information.
More commonly, it's used the way other former officials have reported Cheney wanted it used shortly after the invasion of Iraq, the way it was used during the Salem witch hunts, and the way it was used during the Inquisitions: To make people confess to things they didn't do.
May 21, 2009 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would seriously want Obama to ANSWER Cheney's challenge here - to explain what he has done to put a stop to Torture under his aegis. What is particularly disturbing is that the CCR is alleging that torture is STILL taking place at Gitmo, today, months into Obama's inauguration. WHY???
May 22, 2009 12:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you folks aren't even politically sophisticated enough to spot a good old fashioned smear campaign when it's this glaringly obvious, there's not much hope for the anti-torture side of the debate.
May 22, 2009 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink