« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Durbin: Mukasey Answer "Falls Far Short"
Just out from Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), who has a seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee:
"We asked Judge Mukasey a simple and straightforward question: is waterboarding illegal?"
"While this question has been answered clearly by many others -- including John McCain, the Judge Advocates General, and John Warner -- Judge Mukasey spent four pages responding and still didn’t provide an answer."
"Why is this important? Because the way we treat our prisoners determines how captured Americans are treated. It matters because Americans expect a nominee to the top law enforcement position in the country to give a straight answer. It matters because doing the right thing and taking the moral high road are central to our nation's values."
"Judge Mukasey makes the point that in the law, precision matters. So do honesty and openesss. And on those counts, he falls far short.”
Durbin's statement itself falls short of saying unequivocally whether he will vote against Mukasey. He said earlier, however, that his vote depends on Mukasey calling waterboarding torture.
Comments (16)
Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:46 PM:Senator Durbin:
Is the use of cellophane for less than 10 seconds, where no water enters the mouth or nose, torture? It's a simple and straightforward question.
jackson wrote on October 30, 2007 7:02 PM:Dear Jake D.,
Please read this essay on waterboarding by a former Master Instructor and Chief of Training at the US Navy Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School (SERE).
Is waterboarding tourture? It's a simple and straight forward question.
Should the American government be using the same techniques as the Khmer Rouge, the Spanish Inquisition,and the Gestapo? It's also a simple and straight forward question.
Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 7:07 PM:It has long been established ---and accepted by the US---that mock execution constitutes torture even if no actual actual "organ failure" occurs. It is also established threats to harm a prisoner's family members (commonly practiced by the Gestapo and the KGB) also constitute torture, even if no actual physical harm is done.
With this as a backdrop, it is clear that anything that makes a prisoner fear that he will drown or that his relatives will be harmed constitutes torture.
A Google search will show you that the in the aftermath of WWII, trials of Japanese officers in Japan and the Philipines who tortured prisoners resulted in penalties ranging from long prison terms to death by hanging. The final level of appeal in this proceedings was Gen. Douglas MacArtur himself.
If the Bush Administration is waterboarding people (as is widely thought to be the case) and if it is threatening the children of prisoners (as also appears to be the case regarding Khalil Sheik Mohammed), it stands guilty of torture as it has been historically defined by the US military.
It is thus a situation of extreme moral clarity. Mukasey should be able to reply yes or no to the question regarding waterboarding. There is no room whatsoever for equivocation. That he is doing so means that as AG he will simply be another Gonzalez.
jhh
Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 7:09 PM:jackson:
Do you have a link to the essay? Also, if waterboarding is less than 10 seconds as I described above, no, it is objectively not the "same techniques" and not torture.
Bill wrote on October 30, 2007 7:32 PM:An act of torture isn't required to get a soldier or government agent convicted of committing a war crime. If a detainee is not considered a POW or a civilian, then they fall under Article 75 of the 1977 Geneva Convention protocol. The US is a signatory to this protocol, and the offenses below are considered war crimes under Title 18, Section 118 of the US Code. The penalty could be anything up to life in prison or the death penalty, depending on the harm done. If waterboarding isn't torture, then it's at least corporal punishment or indecent assault and therefore a war crime. The Congressmen should ask Mukasey about that too.
The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:
(a) Violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:
(i) Murder;
(ii) Torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;
( iii ) Corporal punishment ; and
(iv) Mutilation;
(b) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;
(c) The taking of hostages;
(d) Collective punishments; and
(e) Threats to commit any of the foregoing acts
theswan wrote on October 30, 2007 7:35 PM:I doubt Durbin could vote for confirmation after that statement. And he better not.
BG Portland wrote on October 30, 2007 7:43 PM:If America "does not torture" it does not waterboard. Correct? Or does America lie to the world?
I wonder.
To Jake D - why stop at 10 seconds? Not 11, or is that torture? Here is a tip - ANY is torture. Please don't try to confuse the subject with non-related technical definitions. The question is simple - is waterboarding torture? The answer is yes.
And before you ask, yes, I support legal abortion. And the death penalty. And the Constitution. Any I missed?
Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 7:51 PM:BG:
The "average" to withstand waterboarding was 14 seconds, so I picked a number less than 14 -- it was completely arbitrary -- I dispute that less than ONE SECOND could ever objectively be called "torture". Maybe when a Democrat wants to protect America, you guys will finally see the light.
As for your support of legal abortion, the death penalty, and the Constitution, I can hardly say whether you "missed" anything until you tell me what question you think you are responding to.
nofltwlt wrote on October 30, 2007 8:38 PM:This is all well and good but where the fuck is Karl Rove and what is he up to?
Dan D wrote on October 30, 2007 11:35 PM:Jake D:
How many angels can dance on your head?
Stop playing with semantics. Purposely mistreating prisoners is wrong even when it doesn't reach the level of "torture." Torture is just far far worse.
It's sick to even go down this road. So if we turn the temperature down 3 degrees for 12 hours, that's not torture, but 4 degrees would be? Fuck it, if you are purposely putting someone in any kind of pain or discomfort to coerce cooperation and testimony out of them, it's wrong and the US should not do it. Ever.
To answer you specifically, if the prisoner feels like he's drowning for 1 second or 14, he's being tortured in my opinion.
chabuka wrote on October 31, 2007 3:16 AM:And just what the hell is being said about Mukasey's statement that "President" Bush is above the law..? What about that, Dicky Durbin..? You spineless little whimp?
rxbusa wrote on October 31, 2007 4:33 AM:JakeD, is that like the 10-second rule for dropped food? Sounds about as logical.
RickD wrote on October 31, 2007 9:12 AM:Hey, JakeD -
Yes, it is.
Got any other things you need help with?
OK -
dangling a man off a 25-story building by his legs while threatening to drop him is, in fact, torture, even if the person is not dropped.
Burying a person in a coffin with enough air for three hours, and digging him up again 2 hours and 55 minutes later is, in fact, torture.
Anymore of these things you need help with? The basic idea is: scaring the shit out of somebody is torture.
Using the word "cellophane" doesn't change that.
Your argument seems to be - scaring somebody to almost the average breaking point isn't torture. Is that your argument? Do you have a definition of torture we can rip to shreds? Or are you just here to ask smart ass questions?
We have had Democratic Presidents "protect the country" who did a damned fine job of it. I suggest you read the history of the 1940s. In less time than Bush has wasted in Iraq, Presidents Roosevelt and Truman led a concerted national effort that won victories in campaigns all around the globe. Nobody felt any need to resort to torture then.
Oh - but only Republicans are strong on defense.
I'm sorry, I was incorrect when I called you a smart ass. Clearly you are a dumb ass.
moondancer wrote on October 31, 2007 9:55 AM:Waterboarding has been viewed by the US as torture and criminal since the inception of this nation.
Jake D. wrote on October 31, 2007 11:03 AM:To argue length of time as a mitigating factor is sophistry, what I expect from a bushco stooge.
The issue really is the continuation of cheneys' assault on the constitution. They are using this as a wedge to say the chimp in the oval office is above the law. To concede the point, is to acknowledge congress as an overseeing entity. I don't expect them to do that.
Latest "Torturing Mukasey" thread: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004614.php#comments
Lawrence Delaney wrote on October 31, 2007 6:06 PM:If Judge Mukasey is unsure about whether waterboarding is torture there is a simple test.
Simply have the Navy Seals waterboard him.
I know this seems like a medieval test but this is what we are dealing with.