Filed under: Uncategorized , flu, Obama, pandemic, shepard fairey, swine
April 24, 2009 • 12:10 am 0
This Is Poetic
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence released a declassified narrative this week on the history of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel’s opinions on CIA interrogation (a few of the opinions were released recently which are the famous OLC torture memos), you can download it for yourself here: OLC OPINIONS ON THE CIA DETENTION AND INTERROGATION PROGRAM (it’s only 17 pages and is easy to read aside from the litany of officials’ titles).
Here is the poetry, the last paragraph of the report:
On January 22, 2009, the President issued Executive Order 13491 on “Ensuring Lawful Interrogations.” The Executive Order revoked Executive Order 13440, limited the interrogation techniques that may be used by officers, employees, or other agents of the United States Government, and established a Special Interagency Task Force on Interrogation and Transfer Policies to report recommendations to the President. With respect to prior interpretations of law governing interrogation, section 3(c) of Executive Order 13491 directed that, unless the Attorney General provides further guidance, officers, employees, and other agents of the United States Government may not rely on interpretations of the law governing interrogations issued by the Department of Justice between September 11, 2001, and January 20, 2009.
So, what is the “Special Interagency Task Force on Interrogation and Transfer Policies?” I’d love to know what they have been up to…
By the way, here is that Executive Order 13491 “Ensuring Lawful Interrogations”.
Filed under: Uncategorized , 9/11, Abu Zubaydah, Bush, CIA, George W. Bush, Obama, OLC, Special Interagency Task Force on Interrogation and Transfer Policies, torture, waterboarding
April 22, 2009 • 3:21 pm 0
The Torture Issue In A Nutshell
Is it torture to deprive someone of sleep for 3 days and waterboard them 18 times during those 3 days?
Yes.
Is it illegal to order that torture be carried out, even if you get your lawyer to say it’s legal?
Yes.
Is the government required to enforce the law by prosecuting people who ordered that torture be carried out?
Yes.
Bush and Cheney and others need to be charged (at the least, investigated) for ordering torture to be carried out.
Filed under: Uncategorized , 9/11, Abu Zubaydah, Bush, CIA, Department of Justice, DOJ, George W. Bush, Guantanamo, Iraq, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, Obama, Office of Legal Counsel, OLC, sleep deprivation, torture, war crimes, waterboarding
April 20, 2009 • 11:00 pm 0
#tweetblog
http://twitter.com/kkrahel/status/1571747937
http://twitter.com/kkrahel/status/1571768910
Filed under: Uncategorized , 420, anarchism, anti-capitalism, bailouts, banksters, capitalism, economy, equality, inequality, new media, revolution, Twitter, United States
April 16, 2009 • 9:43 pm 0
Is This Torture?
Today, the U.S. Government released four legal memos from the Bush Administration involving interrogation of detainees in USAmerican custody. These memos focus on whether interrogation techniques employed by government agents constitutes torture.
You can download the four torture memos here:
Memo from Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee (now a federal judge)
Memo from Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury
Second memo from Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury
Third memo from Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury
In the first of the memos above, a thorough legal assessment is given as to whether very specific interrogation techniques to be used against Abu Zubaydah violate United States laws against torture. Below is an excerpt, see if you agree with the memo’s findings that these techniques do not constitute torture:
These ten techniques are: (1) attention grasp, (2) walling, (3) facial hold, (4) facial slap (insult slap), (5) cramped confinement, (6) wall standing, (7) stress positions, (8) sleep deprivation, (9) insects placed in a confinement box, and (1) the waterboard. You have informed us that the use of these techniques would be on an as-needed basis and that not all of these techniques will necessarily be used. The interrogation team would use these techniques in some combination to convince Zubaydah that the only way he can influence his surrounding environment is through cooperation. You have, however, informed us that you expect these techniques to be used in some sort of escalating fashion, culminating with the waterboard, though not necessarily ending with this technique. Moreover, you ahve also orally informed us that although some of these techniques may be used with more than once, [sic] that repetition will not be substantial because the techniques generally lose their effectiveness after several repetitions. You have also informed us that Zabaydah [sic] sustained a wound during his capture, which is being treated.
Based on the facts you have given us, we understand each of these techniques to be as follows. The attention grasp consists of grasping the individual with both hands, one hand on each side of the collar opening, in a controlled and quick motion. In the same motion as the grasp, the individual is drawn toward the interrogator.
For walling, a flexible false wall will be constructed. The individual is placed with his heels touching the wall. The interrogator pulls the individual forward and then quickly and firmly pushes the individual into the wall. It is the individual’s shoulder blades that hit the wall. During the motion, the head and neck are supported with a rolled hood or towel that provides a c-collar effect to prevent whiplash. To further reduce the probability of injury, the individual is allowed to rebound from the flexible wall. You have orally informed us that the false wall is in part constructed to create a loud sound when the individual hits it, which will further shock or surprise in the individual. In part, the idea is to create a sound that will make the impact seem far worse than it is and that will be far worse than any injury that might result from the action.
The facial hold is used to hold the head immobile. One open palm is placed on either side of the individual’s face. The fingertips are kept well away from the individual’s eyes.
With the facial slap or insult slap, the interrogator slaps the individual’s face with fingers slightly spread. The hand makes contact with the area directly between the tip of the individual’s chin and the bottom of the corresponding earlobe. The interrogator invades the individual’s personal space. The goal of the facial slap is not to inflict physical pain that is severe or lasting. Instead, the purpose of the facial slap is to induce shock, surprise, and/or humiliation.
Cramped confinement involves the placement of the individual in a confined space, the dimensions of which restrict the individual’s movement. The confined space is usually dark.
The duration of confinement varies based upon the size of the container. For the larger confined space, the individual can stand up or sit down; the smaller space is large enough for the subject to sit down. Confinement in the larger space can last up to eighteen hours; for the smaller space, confinement lasts for no more than two hours.
Wall standing is used to induce muscle fatigue. The individual stands about four to five feet from a wall, with his feet spread approximately to shoulder width. His arms are stretched out in front of him, with his fingers resting on the wall. His fingers support all of his body weight. The individual is not permitted to move or reposition his hands or feet.
A variety of stress positions may be used. You have informed us that these positions are not designed to produce the pain associated with contortions or twisting of the body. Rather, somewhat like walling, they are designed to produce the physical discomfort associated with muscle fatigue. Two particular stress positions are likely to be used on Zubaydah: (1) sitting on the floor with legs extended straight out in front of him with his arms raised above his head; and (2) kneeling on the floor while leaning back at a 45 degree angle. You have also orally informed us that through observing Zubaydah in captivity, you have noted that he appears to be quite flexible despite his wound.
Sleep deprivation may be used. You have indicated that your purpose in using this technique is to reduce the individual’s ability to think on his feet and, through the discomfort associated with lack of sleep, to motivate him to cooperate. The effect of such sleep deprivation will generally remit after one or two nights of uninterrupted sleep. You have informed us that your research has revealed that, in rare instances, some individuals who are already predisposed to psychological problems may experience abnormal reactions to sleep deprivation. Even in those cases, however, reactions abate after the individual is permitted to sleep. Moreover, personnel with medical training are available to and will intervene in the unlikely event of an abnormal reaction. You have orally informed us that you would not deprive Zubaydah of sleep for more than eleven days at a time and that you have previously kept him awake for 72 hours, from which no mental or physical harm resulted.
You would like to place Zubaydah in a cramped confinement box with an insect. You have informed us that he appears to have a fear of insects. In particular, you would like to tell Zubaydah that you intend to place a stinging insect into the box with him. You would, however, place a harmless insect in the box. You have orally informed us that you would in fact place a harmless insect such as a caterpillar in the box with him. [REDACTED]
Finally, you would like to use a technique called the “waterboard.” In this procedure, the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual’s feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner. As this is done, the cloth is lowered until it covers both the nose and mouth. Once the cloth is saturated and completely covers the mouth and nose, air flow is slightly restricted for 20 to 40 seconds due to the presence of the cloth. This causes an increase in carbon dioxide level in the individual’s blood. This increase in the carbon dioxide level stimulates increased effort to breathe. This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of “suffocation and incipient panic,” i.e., the perception of drowning. The individual does not breathe any water into his lungs. During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of twelve to twenty-four inches. After this period, the cloth is lifted, and the individual is allowed to breathe unimpeded for three or four full breaths. The sensation of drowning is immediately relieved by the removal of the cloth. The procedure may then be repeated. The water is usually applied from a canteen cup or small watering can with a spout. You have orally informed us that this procedure triggers an automatic physiological sensation of drowning that the individual cannot control even though he may be aware that he is in fact not drowning. You have also orally informed us that it is likely that this procedure would not last more than 20 minutes in any one application.
Filed under: Uncategorized , 9/11, Abu Zubaydah, Bush, Bybee, detainees, George W. Bush, Guantanamo, interrogation, Obama, sleep deprivation, Steven Bradbury, torture, waterboard, waterboarding
April 15, 2009 • 10:36 pm 0
“Now we get exactly what we deserve – inequality rage”
I would describe reading this as being wakened by a splash of ice-cold water to my face.
Filed under: Uncategorized , bailouts, banksters, bonuses, Bush, capitalism, economic crisis, economic depression, economy, employment, equality, financial crisis, George W. Bush, inequality, nationalization, Obama, revolution, rich, socialism, stimulus, uprising, workers' rights
April 8, 2009 • 1:18 am 1
Solving The Financial Crisis
Multiple attempts have been made to solve the financial crisis: the original TARP plan of Treasury Secretary Paulson (R-Goldman Sachs), his subsequent completely changed TARP plan, the aborted initial scheme of Treasury Secretary Geithner, and his new PPIP (sidenote: Geithner failed to pay $30,000 in taxes yet HE is the person in charge of the IRS). Needless to say, none of these schemes have worked. If we want to get out of this mess, we need to understand what is going on.
Banks have lots of money invested in highly complex bundles of assets, some of these assets are subprime mortgages, for example. Many of these bundles are “toxic assets” (or “troubled assets” as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) refers to). These bundles were basically bought by banks at a much higher value than they are now worth due to the collapse of the housing market bubble (which, as the name implies, was an over-inflation of the market’s prices for real estate). All the big banks – of which there are essentially only four remaining: Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo – have so much of these over-valued and over-leveraged (over-leveraging is the fundamental issue of the financial crisis - basically the entire economy was vastly over-leveraged) assets that they are insolvent (read: bankrupt). Through their political power, however, the banks have been able to avoid bankruptcy proceedings. This leads us to the situation we are in now: banks are bankrupt, lending has stopped, and the wider economy is grinding to a halt as a result.
If the banks went through bankruptcy, their equity holders would lose all of their money; as would happen when any company went bankrupt. Those who would lose money from bankruptcy (the rich) have prevented it through their control of the political system. The government has given out around $7-10 TRILLION (the USAmerican GDP is $14 trillion) to get the banks lending again. Every person is being made to pay so that these banks – and specifically their equity holders – do not lose money.
Fundamentally, either the bankers have to lose money for what THEY have done or we have to lose it for them. These BANKSTERS are stealing from the poor to give to the rich. (If you consider someone to be poor if they make less than ONE THIRD of what the rich make, 99% of the United States is poor.) It is likely that this is the largest transfer of wealth – up or down – in history.
And it hasn’t solved the financial crisis. Until we break up the banks we will be stuck in this crisis…
(There is an ALTERNATIVE to “solving” the financial crisis: abolish the financial and capitalist system. Why would we want to solve and preserve a system that, in crisis and not, forces us out of our homes, denies us basic healthcare, and unnecessarily makes us slave for half of our waking adult lives?)
***This is from a past post from this blog which I edited for a friend’s thing; but I appreciated what became of it, so I decided to (re)post it***
Filed under: Uncategorized , bailouts, bankruptcy, banksters, capitalism, economic crisis, economic depression, economy, financial crisis, nationalization, revolution, uprising
April 6, 2009 • 11:01 pm 0
Break Up The Banks
If they’re too big to fail, they’re too big to exist!
NYC protest in Union Square this Saturday 4/11 at 2pm.
Other cities nationwide listed at http://anewwayforward.org/demonstrations/rally-list.php
This is the time for protest. This is the time to take back this country.
This is going to be a big one, too. Major press, lots of organizations. MORE THAN 35 CITIES.
Filed under: Uncategorized , A New Way Forward, bailouts, banksters, economic crisis, economic depression, economy, nationalization, Obama, Timothy Geithner, uprising
