{"id":2698,"date":"2008-12-12T22:26:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-13T03:26:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=2698"},"modified":"2008-12-13T00:11:18","modified_gmt":"2008-12-13T05:11:18","slug":"legacies-and-hermaneutics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2008\/12\/12\/legacies-and-hermaneutics\/","title":{"rendered":"legacies and hermaneutics…"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
<\/div>\n
\n
Pack of Liars<\/strong><\/a>
By Dan Froomkin
Washington Post<\/div>\n

Yesterday’s bipartisan Senate report on the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere doesn’t just lay out a clear line of responsibility starting with President Bush, it also exposes the administration’s repeated explanation for what happened as a pack of lies. <\/p>\n

"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of ‘a few bad apples’ acting on their own," the report finds. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees. Those efforts damaged our ability to collect accurate intelligence that could save lives, strengthened the hand of our enemies, and compromised our moral authority." <\/p>\n

The report notes that in early 2002, not long after the Defense Department legal counsel’s office started exploring the application of the sorts of abhorrent practices later documented at Abu Ghraib, Bush signed a memo exempting war-on-terror detainees from the Geneva Conventions. "[T]he decision to replace well established military doctrine, i.e., legal compliance with the Geneva Conventions, with a policy subject to interpretation, impacted the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody," the report states. <\/p>\n

And the report concludes: "The abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib in late 2003 was not simply the result of a few soldiers acting on their own. Interrogation techniques such as stripping detainees of their clothes, placing them in stress positions, and using military working dogs to intimidate them appeared in Iraq only after they had been approved for use in Afghanistan and at [Guantanamo]. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s December 2, 2002 authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques and subsequent interrogation policies and plans approved by senior military and civilian officials conveyed the message that physical pressures and degradation were appropriate treatment for detainees in U.S. military custody. What followed was an erosion in standards dictating that detainees be treated humanely"… <\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
While all of our other troubles are eclipsing this report, it stands as the paradigm of our last eight year. Froomkin goes on to tell us why: <\/div>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n

But Levin could have gone much higher. Bush himself repeatedly and sanctimoniously blamed Abu Ghraib on a small number of low-level perpetrators,… <\/p>\n