PLRC Blog

 This Blog Supplements Chapter 9 of America in Peril.

Within 48 hours of becoming President, Barack Obama signed a barrage of executive orders, including 13491 to stop US torture and permanently close secret CIA jails.  It revoked all previous executive orders, directives, and regulations inconsistent with this order.  Called “Ensuring Lawful Interrogations,” it was signed 22 January 2009.  Obama said he wants to send “an unmistakable signal that our actions in defense of liberty will be (as) just as our cause.” [Cited in Spetalnick and Alexander]

This new executive order doesn’t shut down all secret CIA jails.  It allows that, “facilities used only to hold people on a short-term, transitory basis” are excluded.  How long is short-term?  What does transitory mean?  Those terms are open-ended.  A big loophole. 

The order seemed pretty straightforward in prohibiting for all US personnel, or at any US facility, the use of “any interrogation technique or approach, or any treatment related to interrogation, that is not authorized by and listed in Army Field Manual 2-22-3.”  Furthermore, the techniques, approaches, and treatments used “shall be implemented strictly in accord with the principles, processes, conditions, and limitations the Manual prescribes.”  Finally, those conducting interrogations cannot rely on any interpretation of laws governing interrogations.  They can rely only on Army Field Manual 2-22-3, which was prepared in accord with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and other international and federal laws relevant to this subject. 

Executive Order 13491 does not expressly forbid “extraordinary rendition.”  Rendition in law is the handing over of, or rendering, a person to another jurisdiction according to legal proceedings.  Extradition is a form of rendition.  Extraordinary rendition, on the other hand, is outside the law.  According to this new executive order the CIA can still secretly kidnap a person and send them to another country for interrogation which may include torture.  A typical method of abduction is carried out by people wearing ski masks who strip their victim, put him in a diaper, and take him aboard an airplane blindfolded and shackled.

Extraordinary rendition (sometimes simply and erroneously called rendition) has been an extremely controversial practice since it began.  The European Parliament classed it as an illegal US instrument.  An extensive investigation by the European Union identified 1,200 CIA-operated flights over its territory since 9-11, and implied that most of them were rendition related.  US intelligence officials say the EU statistics are greatly exaggerated.  Some who were involved in renditions downplay their value and claim they have proven unproductive.  Then CIA Director Michael Hayden said in 2007 that the number of renditions since 9-11 were less than a hundred.

An Obama administration official speaking anonymously said it is obvious “you need to preserve some tools – you still have to go after the bad guys.  The legal advisors working on this looked at rendition.  It is controversial in some circles and kicked up a big storm in Europe.  But if done within certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice.” [Cited in Miller]  As a concession, Obama’s executive order established a Special Interagency Task Force “to study and evaluate the practice of transferring individual to other nations” and to make sure such practices comply with domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States,” and to make certain that such practices “do not result in transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control.”

That mission statement was the only place extraordinary rendition was alluded to in the executive order.  But new CIA Director Leon Panetta said during confirmation hearings that Obama forbids “that kind of extraordinary rendition – when we send someone for the purpose of torture or actions by another country that violate our human values.” [Cited in Hess]  Does this indicate Panetta will put a tight contrl over extraordinary renditions?

Panetta’s subsequent testimony sheds some light on that question.  President Bush issued secret directives after 9-11 that significantly expanded the CIA’s ability to practice extraordinary rendition but former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said the CIA receives assurances that rendered persons will be treated humanely.  Panetta told the Senate “I will seek the same kind of assurances that they will not be treated inhumanely.” [Cited in Cohn.]  Of course, once an individual is turned over to another country there is no guarantee such provisions will be observed.  Neither is there any expectation that CIA officials in the field will care what happens – may even expect and want torture – as long as they have such assurances to protect themselves.

It is important that we remember one important thing: the details of the extraordinary rendition program remain a deep secret.  We the public cannot verify that what we are told is what actually happens.  Although new Attorney General Eric Holder said during his confirmation that prisoners should not be sent to another country to be tortured, there is no indication that he will make extraordinary rendition activities more transparent.  On February 9^th the new Justice Department invoked the “state secrets” privilege when requesting dismissal of a lawsuit by torture victims caught in the extraordinary rendition program.  When one judge asked twice if the change of administration didn’t affect the Justice Department’s position, the US attorney said it remained the same.

With severe restrictions put on torture, extraordinary rendition may become a very popular option.  It is the only remaining tool for harsh interrogation techniques.  The temptation will be great for CIA officers in the field to take advantage of this means to outsource torture. 

# # # # #

References.

Cohn, Marjorie; “A Call to End All Renditions,” Jurist, 10 February 2009.

Executive Order 13491; “Ensuring Lawful Interrogations,” signed 22 January 2009.

Hess, Pamela (Associated Press writer); “Panetta: Obama Won’t OK ‘Extraordinary Rendition’,” Yahoo News, 5 February 2009.

Miller, Greg; “Obama Preserves Renditions as Counter-terrorism Tool,” Los Angeles Times, 1 February 2009.

Spetalnick, Matt and David Alexander; “Obama Orders Guantanamo Shut,” Reuters, 22 January 2009.

This Blog Supplements Chapter 10 of America in Peril

Congressman Alcee Hastings recently introduced House Resolution 645, the “National Emergency Centers Establishment Act.”  The specifics indicated are that the Act will provide temporary housing and assistance for families displaced by disaster, and as a centralized area for training and and other responses to an emergency.

That all sounds very good, especially as we recall the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.  But one inconspicuous phrase buried at the end says these emergency centers are also “to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security” (see section 2, paragraph (b), line (4) of the Act)  This is another one of those catch-all phrases that I described in America in Peril which opens the door to almost anything.  With prediction of riots and other civil disorders likely to occur with the deepening economic crisis, one of those events the door is opened to is civilian internment under martial law.  Coupled with the recent buildup of troops for the Northern Command, that is particularly ominous.

Rather than go into detail that duplicates others’ work, I recommend that you review the reference at the end of this blog.  The article by Paul Joseph Watson is especially good at describing the Act and what it portends.  He ties H.R. 645 in with things I discussed in chapter 10 of America in Peril, such as KBR’s $385 million federal contract to construct emergency detention facilities and the Pentagon’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program.  The full text of H.R. 645 is appended to his article

Bob Aldridge

References:

Watson, Paul Joseph; “Police State: New Legislation Authorizes FEMA Camps In U.S.,” Global Research, 28 January 2009.  Available at http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=12073