Jack Goldsmith tells Obama: No New Torture Probes

[friendly_iconoclast]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/25/AR2008112501897_pf.html

No New Torture Probes
By Jack Goldsmith
Wednesday, November 26, 2008; A13

There has been much speculation about how the Obama administration will deal with what many view as the Bush administration's harsh, abusive and illegal interrogation program. Some have called for an investigation by Congress or the Justice Department, possibly leading to criminal sanctions. Others think such investigations are infeasible or would smack of political retribution, proposing instead that a bipartisan commission look into the matter.

These are all bad ideas. They would bring little benefit, and they would further weaken the Justice Department and the CIA in ways that would compromise our security. (I worked at the Justice Department from 2003 to 2004 on issues that probably would be subject to new investigations, so readers should consider my views accordingly.)

To begin with, all of the relevant facts -- who approved what, what the legal opinions say and what actually happened -- are well known inside the government. The interrogation and related programs have been extensively scrutinized in public sessions of Congress, in many classified sessions by congressional intelligence committees, in several investigations by the CIA inspector general and the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility and by the special prosecutor investigating the destruction of interrogation tapes.....

As another blogger said:
Who knew the rule of law was a threat to national security?

[tularetom]

1. Why is the Washington Post giving space to a war criminal?

It doesn't take a Mensa candidate to see what this douchebag is up to.

[babylonsister]

2. He worked for Ashcroft. Is he a viable voice, do you think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Goldsmith

Jack Landman Goldsmith is a Harvard Law School professor who has written a number of texts regarding international law and the Internet.<1> From October 2003 to July 2004,<2> he served under Attorney General John Ashcroft and Deputy Attorney General James Comey<3> as an United States Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice.

[derby378]

3. Fuck THAT noise!

Can Goldsmith be prosecuted for aiding and abetting known felons? Just planting seeds...

[Metta]

4. Happy karma, Jack. You inherit the pain of others if you don't help them.

... when you can. Send us a post card from hell.

[stillcool]

5. I look back on the Iran/Contra hearings...

with fondness. We used to get all lit up, and watch CNN, way back when CNN was CNN. Oh to be young again.

[leveymg]

6. Let's put it this way, The national security state is a threat to the rule of law.

Jack, you just went from hero to zero, in my book.

[w4rma]

7. The rule of law needs to be restored and those that broke it need to be punished. (nt)

[cokeboat]

8. hmmm....

interesting

[noise]

9. Where was the good faith?

The very fact that Mr. Martinez, a career narcotics analyst who did not speak the terrorists’ native languages and had no interrogation experience, would end up as a crucial player captures the ad-hoc nature of the program. Officials acknowledge that it was cobbled together under enormous pressure in 2002 by an agency nearly devoid of expertise in detention and interrogation.

Inside a 9/11 Mastermind’s Interrogation

This is the brilliant interrogation program. Anyone seeking real intel wouldn't resort to this sort of nonsense. Thus it makes sense that people like Goldsmith would resort to fearmongering to sell the public. They can't sell the program on its' merits. It is a garbage program.

Look at the main salesmen of the program:

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, Addington, Yoo and Haynes.

Are they credible?