Obama Continues Extraordinary Rendition
Truly disappointing, not just for the fact that we know abuse will continue, but because the idea of kidnapping people constitutes abuse in and of itself.
And this after we thought Obama might change his mind…
Though the Obama administration previously signaled that it would continue the use of renditions, some civil liberties groups were disappointed because, as a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama had strongly suggested he might end the practice. In an article in Foreign Affairs in the summer of 2007, Mr. Obama wrote, “To build a better, freer world, we must first behave in ways that reflect the decency and aspirations of the American people.”
Mr. Obama continued, “This means ending the practices of shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, of detaining thousands without charge or trial, of maintaining a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law.” In January, the president ordered secret prisons run by the C.I.A. to be shut down.
No such luck I guess.
However, the administration is proposing changes so people aren’t physically tortured…
The administration officials, who discussed the changes on condition that they not be identified, said that unlike the Bush administration, they would operate more openly and give the State Department a larger role in assuring that transferred detainees would not be abused.
“The emphasis will be on ensuring that individuals will not face torture if they are sent overseas,” said one administration official, adding that no detainees would be sent to countries known to conduct abusive interrogations.
So yes, positive steps…however…
We’ve seen how people have been kidnapped, mentally and physically tortured and then released with a “My bad!”…and that’s just wrong. Stealing people from their lives is abuse, plain and simple. And it’ll happen again…so shame on the Obama administration.
Here’s the question: Why can’t we just end the practice of extraordinary rendition?
(Photo: Getty via Daylife)
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
“…that no detainees would be sent to countries known to conduct abusive interrogations.”
So, we’ll be sending kidnapped “prisoners” to where? Sweden? Switzerland? Sure we will. This isn’t even a positive step. In fact, it’s no step at all. Every previous administration said we wouldn’t be sending prisoners to countries known to torture – and it was always a lie.
The whole rendition program should be canceled unless we allow for the same to be done to our citizens. Let Spain send some hit squads into our country to kidnap John Yoo! Let France do the same so they can get their hands on Henry Kissinger! The wrong of rendition won’t be cured by such things – but it would certainly make it fair.
Exactly…what countries don’t torture that we’d want to send these folks to? Would we be sending them to our military bases on foreign soil since the FBI is now in charge of interrogations?
In 1991 in the run up to the first middle east incursion, Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney gave three priorities to the Senate on fighting the Gulf War: prevent further aggression; protect oil supplies; and, further a new world order. The latter bit did not refer to an Illuminati plot for one world government but a political theory that revolves around the recognition that the United States would be the world’s only super-power and would exercise that power unilaterally. The UN would not be ignored but co-oped and it would be the US who would enforce charters and sanctions as it chooses.
When Cheney became Vice-President this idea of a new world order took a more decisive direction with the implementation of the Bush Doctrine which in effect said we could attack any country deemed an enemy or interfered with our general welfare. The UN was pushed into a “advisory” position and only had to recognize our target as a unsuitable for the “family of nations”.
The problem with this interpretation of a new world order is the centralization of power or the perceived power in the West Wing. While Bush Jr. proved the fallacy of the theory the power remains and will never be surrendered. Presidents now believe that they have control not only over the actions of the country but the world. That the CIA can pick up anyone they please, anywhere in the world, like Chicago thugs without any fears of repercussion and take them to extralegal backrooms and work them over used to be the stuff of spy novels and the ravings of conspiracy nuts.
Not any longer.
It is one thing to compare our economy to a Banana Republic but for our government to behave like some nineteenth century junta is beyond the comprehension of anyone taught American civics. Kidnapping is a crime in every democracy on the planet and for our President to casually announce to the world his criminal intentions based on some political theory should be an impeachable offense. This idea puts the President not only in violation of US law but in violation of countless treaties.
I voted for change, for sanity, for a return to dignity and law, not for more of the same.