Leon Panetta Absolves CIA Torturers…Why?

Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009 10:35 PM
Category: Allgov Blogs

On Thursday, CIA Director Leon Panetta sent an e-mail to CIA employees reassuring them that no one who engaged in torture would be held accountable as long as they were following orders. In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Clinton signed into law, the U.S. War Crimes Act. The Act, created and promoted by Republicans, made it a federal crime to commit a “grave breach” of the Geneva Conventions, meaning the deliberate “killing, torture or inhuman treatment” of detainees. It includes “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” Violations of the War Crimes Act that result in the death of a detainee carry the death penalty and they do not have a statute of limitations. Although it was initiated to prosecute foreigners who mistreat American prisoners, Congress, in an admirable display of bipartisan support for human rights, applied the law as well to American treatment of foreign prisoners of war, reasoning that we should hold ourselves to the same standards we hold others.

 
In a memo to President Bush dated January 25, 2002, then White House counsel Alberto Gonzales suggested that Bush find a way to avoid the rules of the Geneva Conventions as they relate to prisoners of war because that “substantially reduces the likelihood of prosecution under the War Crimes Act.” A week later, Attorney General John Ashcroft sent a memo to the president also stressing that opting out of the Geneva treaty “would provide the highest assurance that no court would subsequently entertain charges that American military officers, intelligence officials, or law enforcement officials violated Geneva Convention rules relating to field conduct, detention conduct or interrogation of detainees.” Ashcroft reminded Bush, “The War Crimes Act of 1996 makes violation of parts of the Geneva Convention a crime in the United States.”
 
This led to all sorts of twisted arguments that anyone picked up anywhere during the “War on Terror” wasn’t a prisoner of war and that anyone held at Guantánamo or Bagram was not subject to U.S. law. These arguments were rejected by the Supreme Court in its 2006 Hamdan v. Rumsfeld decision. Considering that the Pentagon has admitted that at least 35 detainees have been murdered by their guards, the question of bringing torture charges against CIA agents and others is not a theoretical issue.
 
Not to worry, though, because President Obama and CIA Director Panetta have made it clear that even murderers will not be called to justice as long as they can prove that they were just following orders.
 
This decision is so damaging to U.S. credibility abroad, that it is worth considering why Obama and Panetta would do such a thing. In a best case scenario, they are granting immunity to the torture perpetrators in order to build a case against those who gave the orders, specifically President Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Major General Geoffrey Miller and Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez  In a middle-ground scenario, Obama and Panetta are too wishy-washy to stand up to the CIA and to former Bush administration members. In a worst case scenario, they want to reserve for themselves the right to ignore U.S. law, just like the Bush team did. If this last scenario turns out to be the true one, it would be a tragedy, because it would send a message to future generations that all laws relating to human rights in the United States are irrelevant if the president says it is alright to ignore them.

Latest News

Why Do They Hate Us? A 20-Year Update

In the days following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, many people I spoke with simply could not understand why anyone, anywhere, would not like Americans, even if it was just a few dozen fanatics. In one form or another, they asked: Why do they hate us? Back in 2001, I tried to address this question in a short essay I wrote one month after the attacks.   read more

Biden Announces U.S. Invasion of Grenada

President Joe Biden announced that United States troops were launching an invasion of the Caribbean island nation of Grenada. Considering that Grenada does not have an army, Pentagon officials predicted that complete takeover of the island would go quickly and without U.S. casualties. Democratic members of Congress praised the invasion. “It worked for Reagan,” said one Democratic spokesman who requested anonymity, “so why shouldn’t it work for Biden?”   read more

Revealed: Republican Infiltrators Created “Defund the Police”!

“I paid some black guys to infiltrate the Black Lives Matter movement and start chanting, ‘Defund the Police.’ It worked perfectly. It galvanized frightened whites to get out and vote against pro-crime Democrats. If Trump hadn’t f---up the Covid issue, we would have swept both houses of Congress and kept the White House. But don’t worry. We’ll push the same phrase in the 2022 elections."   read more

Republicans Agree to D.C. Statehood…on One Condition

In a breakthrough announcement, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) declared that Republicans will accept the District of Colombia as the 51st state on the condition that, at the same time, Congress and President Joe Biden give approval to a 52nd state: West Wyoming.   read more

JPMorgan Chase’s Soccer Super League

Twelve of the richest teams from England, Spain and Italy have announced the formation of a breakaway Super League (without consulting the players, of course). Each team would be guaranteed revenue of at least $250 million. Where would this enormous sum of money come from? From the United States. Specifically from JPMorgan Chase, the largest U.S. bank.   read more
see more...