An Ode to the Passive Voice

I like to boldly split infinitives as much as von. But I write in praise of another grammatical antihero—the passive voice.

It’s just so useful. It can defend the indefensible, obscure meanings faster than a speeding bullet, erase responsibility in a single stroke….

(Or rather: defense of the indefensible has been enabled by it. Significant contributions to obscuring-of-meanings and responsibility-erasing related program activities have also been made.)

For example, this:

I also think that the rather transparent effort to use this against Bush — often by people who think nothing of cozying up to the likes of Castro, for whom torture and murder are essential tools of governance — has caused the Abu Ghraib issue to be taken less seriously than perhaps it ought to be.

sounds much better than this:

People are criticizing Bush about the Abu Ghraib scandal. Some of them—I won’t say who, or give any examples—once cozied up to Fidel Castro, or someone like him, or they would given the chance. Therefore, I will not take seriously the evidence of torture by U.S. troops, or the possibility that the Bush administration condones torture.

Unfortunately, my junior high English teachers taught me never to use the passive voice. So I was left telling my mother:

My sister’s room is dirtier and you don’t yell at her! And I was GOING to clean my room, but now I won’t because you’re nagging me so much so THERE!!!” (stomp stomp stomp) (slammed door)*

when this would have sounded so much nicer:

The irrationally hostile tone of your voice, coupled with the transparent neglect of the far greater disarray of my sister’s room, has led the clothes-all-over-the-floor situation to be taken less seriously than perhaps it otherwise would have been.

More seriously, not that Glenn Reynolds will ever read this in a billion years:

People are attacking the Bush administration over this because there is an awful lot of evidence implicating them. They’ve written legal memos justifying torture and unlimited presidential power, one of which was signed by the head of the office of legal counsel. They’ve deported an innocent** men to torture in Syria, based on “confessions” extracted from other men tortured in Syria. The Deputy Attorney General, acting as Attorney General, signed the order deporting Arar. There is probably a “presidential finding” signed by Bush authorizing “extraordinary renditions.” There were no JAG officers at Abu Ghraib, and not because JAG officers were not available. They ignored warnings from the Red Cross. I’m not even going to get into all the incriminating details about Abu Ghraib; see this post for more. They did not apologize for any of this until pictures came out. They still haven’t admitted any mistake that hasn’t been illustrated with pictures. And they still won’t tell the public anything about what they’re doing.

Saying “I’m against torture” is all well and good. But abstract opposition is not worth much, when your response to credible allegations that your government condones torture is to ignore the evidence, blame the messenger, and change the subject.

And if none of that convinces you, I’ve even graciously provided ammunition for an argument that it’s Bill Clinton’s fault!

Read more

Extraordinary Rendition: Not Just for Republicans!

Until tonight, I knew vaguely that the policy of “extraordinary rendition”–sending terrorism suspects to countries that practice torture for interrogation–started under the Clinton administration. But I did not know any of the details.

Tonight I came across this 2001 Wall Street Journal story*, and learned the details:

CIA-Backed Team Used Brutal Means To Break Up Terrorist Cell in Albania

By ANDREW HIGGINS and CHRISTOPHER COOPER
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

TIRANA, Albania — Ahmed Osman Saleh stepped off a minibus here in the Albanian capital in July 1998 and caught what would be his last glimpse of daylight for three days. As he paid the driver, Albanian security agents slipped a white cloth bag over Mr. Saleh’s head, bound his limbs with plastic shackles and tossed him into the rear of a hatchback vehicle.

Supervising the operation from a nearby car were agents from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.

Mr. Saleh’s Albanian captors sped over rutted roads to an abandoned air base 35 miles north of Tirana. There, recalled an Albanian security agent who participated, guards dumped the bearded self-confessed terrorist on the floor of a windowless bathroom.

After two days of interrogation by CIA agents and sporadic beatings by Albanian guards, Mr. Saleh was put aboard a CIA-chartered plane and flown to Cairo, according to the Albanian agent and a confession Egyptian police elicited from Mr. Saleh in September 1998. “I remained blindfolded until I got off the plane,” Mr. Saleh said in the confession, a document written in Arabic longhand that he signed at the bottom.

There were more beatings and torture at the hands of Egyptian authorities. And 18 months after he was grabbed outside the Garden of Games, a Tirana childrens’ park, Mr. Saleh was hanged in an Egyptian prison yard.

By the Script
His capture was one of five scripted and overseen by American agents as part of a covert 1998 operation to deport members of the Egyptian Jihad organization to Cairo from the Balkans. At the time, Egyptian Jihad was merging with Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network. U.S. authorities considered the Tirana cell among the most dangerous terror outfits in Europe. The CIA has refused to acknowledge the 1998 operation. But privately, U.S. officials have described it as one of the most successful counterterrorism
efforts in the annals of the intelligence agency….

About a dozen U.S. agents arrived in Albania to plan the arrests, according to their Albanian counterparts. CIA and SHIK operatives spent three months devising the operation, often meeting in a conference room next to Mr. Klosi’s office.

On June 25, 1998, the Egyptian government issued a prearranged arrest warrant for Mr. Attiya, the forger, and demanded his deportation. Most such requests to Western countries had been ignored in the past, said Hisham Saraya, Egypt’s attorney general at the time. This one was not.

That day, while driving in his 1986 Audi in Tirana, Mr. Attiya found himself being trailed by an Albanian police car and another vehicle, he later recalled in his confession. He was stopped and arrested. The same day, Albanian security officers raided his home and found more than 50 plates and stamps used to produce fake visas and other bogus documents, according to court records from his 1999 trial.

Several days later, he was taken, handcuffed and blindfolded, to the abandoned air base, north of Tirana. “There, a private plane was waiting for me,” he said in his confession. Once in Cairo, he was blindfolded again and driven to Egypt’s state security offices on July 2, 1998. “Since then, the interrogations have not stopped,” he said.

Mr. Attiya later told his lawyer, Hafez Abu-Saada, that while being questioned, he was subjected to electrical shocks to his genitals, suspended by his limbs, dragged on his face, and made to stand for hours in a cell, with filthy water up to his knees. Mr. Abu-Saada, who represented all five members of the Tirana cell, subsequently recorded their complaints in a published report.

Also deported from Tirana was Mr. Naggar. He was nabbed in July 1998 by SHIK on a road outside of town. He, too, was blindfolded and spirited home on a CIA plane. In complaints in his confession and to his defense lawyer, Mr. Abu-Saada, Mr. Naggar said his Egyptian interrogators regularly applied electrical shocks to his nipples and penis.

Mr. Naggar’s brother, Mohamed, said in an interview that he and his relatives also were — and continue to be — harassed and tortured by Egyptian police. He said he had suffered broken ribs and fractured cheekbones. “They changed my features,” Mohamed Naggar said, touching his face.

About two weeks after Messrs. Attiya and Naggar were deported to Egypt, Albanian security agents took Mr. Tita, the dues-collector, from his Tirana apartment. They covered his head and put him on a plane. “After I was arrested, [Egyptian interrogators] hung me from my wrists and applied electricity to parts of my feet and back,” he said in his confession.

As the CIA operation drew to a close, an Arab newspaper in London published a letter on August 5, 1998, signed by the International Islamic Front for Jihad. The letter vowed revenge for the counterterrorism drive in Albania, promising to retaliate against Americans in a “language they will understand.”

Two days later, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were blown up, killing 224 people. U.S. investigators have attributed the embassy bombings to al Qaeda and now believe the attacks were planned far in advance. At the time, American officials were rattled enough about the possible connection to the
Tirana arrests that they closed the U.S. Embassy there, moving the staff to a more-secure compound across town.

The embassy bombings didn’t stop the CIA from going after Mr. Saleh in Tirana. In August, Albanian security agents grabbed him outside the children’s park. During two months of detention in Egypt, he was suspended from the ceiling of his cell and given electrical shocks, he told his lawyer, Mr. Abu-Saada. Also rounded up was Essam Abdel-Tawwab, an Egyptian Jihad member who had lived for a time in Tirana before moving to Sofia, Bulgaria. He, too, later told Mr. Abu-Saada he was tortured. Egyptian prosecutors acknowledged in court documents that they observed a “recovered wound” on Mr. Tawwab’s body.

Bill Clinton is not President anymore, and I wasn’t a huge fan of his when he was. I already knew that part of the groundwork for the “extraordinary rendition” policy was laid during his presidency. I’ve said a hundred times that this is not and should not be a partisan issue. But apparently I am more naive and more partisan than I’d like to think, because when I read this article I was shocked that this could happen under a Democratic president. I promptly set to work on an internal list of the differences between this case, and Abu Ghraib and Maher Arar’s deportation:

–Unlike the Arar case and Abu Ghraib, most of the suspects tortured here were almost certainly terrorists who were actively planning to kill innocent people. The Tirana cell was started by Ayman Al-Zawahiri’s younger brother. While coerced confessions are unreliable, there is a lot of corroboration in this case. (Read the full article for details.) The CIA was not rounding up innocent Iraqis or people who’d had lunch with terrorists’ brothers’ acquaintances one time. They gathered a lot of evidence before they acted.

–This specific operation may not have been approved by anyone on the cabinet level, unlike Arar’s deportation. We don’t know the details of Clinton administration’s policy on “extraordinary renditions”, and according to at least one article they actually tried to get Egypt to comply with the torture convention and eventually cut ties to them when they refused. There was nothing like the concerted legal effort to justify torture that we’ve seen from the Bush administration.

–Most of these men were actual Egyptian citizens, some of whom had actually committed crimes in Egypt. Ahmed Saleh was wanted for a botched assassination attempt of a government minister, and a car bombing (that might be one or two incidents; I can’t tell from the article.) Shawki Attiya was wanted on forgery charges, though these may have been drawn up with CIA assistance. I don’t have any expertise on this subject, but this seems less flagrantly illegal than deporting a Canadian citizen changing planes in JFK to Syria.

Really, though, what’s the use? I prefer torturing the guilty to torturing the innocent, but torture is torture. It was still illegal. It was still wrong. It was still unnecessary.**

Read more

Another Torture Memo

The Washington Post has printed the Office of Legal Counsel’s memo from August 1, 2002, in full. Some thoughts: 1. I had wondered before where they came up with “the level [of pain] that would ordinarily be associated with a sufficiently serious physical condition or injury such as death, organ failure,or serious impairment of body … Read more

Meet Our Employees

As a follow up to the Guardian/Observer article I linked to in the last post, I decided to do some research into the human rights records of the countries where we have reportedly “rendered” terrorism suspects. Specifically, their use of torture.
To avoid debates about source credibility, and save time, I relied exclusively on the U.S. State Department’s 2003 Human Rights Reports.

The results are grim, and long, but I think they are important–even necessary–to read. These people are working for us. Not just with us, but for us. Our government is sending prisoners into their custody for interrogation.

Someone will probably argue that our survival is at stake, and we need allies in this fight, even unsavory ones. I agree. Someone may ask me if I think we were wrong to ally with Josef Stalin in World War 2. Of course I don’t think that. Someone may ask me if I think Egypt or Azerbaijan is worse than Stalin’s USSR. Again: of course not.

Alliances are fine and necessary. This is something else. I don’t believe Churchill and FDR ever sent German or Japanese prisoners of war to Siberia for interrogation.

With that out of the way, here are the results, in alphabetical order:

Read more

“We acted fully within the law…”

Two recent news items on “extraordinary rendition”: 1) Maher Arar’s lawyers allege that Canadian CSIS agents (the equivalent of CIA agents, I believe) travelled to Syria in 2002 and got copies of “confessions” that Syria had tortured out of him: In the submission, Arar’s counsel say James Lockyer and Michael Edelson, who both represented Arar … Read more

Non-Denial Denials

From the news conference today:

Q Mr. President, the Justice Department issued an advisory opinion last year declaring that as Commander-in-Chief you have the authority to order any kind of interrogation techniques that are necessary to pursue the war on terror. Were you aware of this advisory opinion? Do you agree with it? And did you issue any such authorization at any time?

THE PRESIDENT: No, the authorization I issued, David, was that anything we did would conform to U.S. law and would be consistent with international treaty obligations. That’s the message I gave our people.

Q Have you seen the memos?

THE PRESIDENT: I can’t remember if I’ve seen the memo or not, but I gave those instructions….

Q Returning to the question of torture, if you knew a person was in U.S. custody and had specific information about an imminent terrorist attack that could kill hundreds or even thousands of Americans, would you authorize the use of any means necessary to get that information and to save those lives?

THE PRESIDENT: Jonathan, what I’ve authorized is that we stay within U.S. law….

Q Mr. President, I wanted to return to the question of torture. What we’ve learned from these memos this week is that the Department of Justice lawyers and the Pentagon lawyers have essentially worked out a way that U.S. officials can torture detainees without running afoul of the law. So when you say that you want the U.S. to adhere to international and U.S. laws, that’s not very comforting. This is a moral question: Is torture ever justified?

THE PRESIDENT: Look, I’m going to say it one more time. If I — maybe — maybe I can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to law. That ought to comfort you. We’re a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at those laws, and that might provide comfort for you. And those were the instructions out of — from me to the government.

It does not comfort me.

The position the memo takes is that it is sometimes consistent with U.S. law, and international treaties, for the President to set aside acts of Congress and to order or authorize torture of prisoners. The administration will not release the memo to Congress, or say whether they adopted its findings, or discuss it in any way. So these answers tell us nothing.

The fact that the President won’t give a meaningful answer, perhaps tells us something. The fact that the Democrats on Judiciary are not sure they’ll find one G.O.P. Senator to cross the aisle and officially request the memo, according to this AP story, perhaps tells us something. The fact that Orrin Hatch told the AP that releasing the memos would “cause the deaths of our young people … by publicizing something that shouldn’t be publicized,” perhaps tells us something.

I don’t know whether Hatch is afraid for our troops, or afraid for Bush’s re-election, or both. But he’s afraid of something. If the memo is as hypothetical and harmless an exercise as some of the President’s supporters say, the best thing to do for our troops is to prove it. Release this memo, and release the ones that shows the advice was rejected, and explain what the policy actually is.

Read more

The Memo

Excerpts from a Department of Defense memo on the use of torture, from a Wall Street Journal article today: “In order to respect the president’s inherent constitutional authority to manage a military campaign … (the prohibition against torture) must be construed as inapplicable to interrogations undertaken pursuant to his commander-in chief authority…” After defining torture … Read more

Ordinary Rendition

(an update on the Arar case and related “renditions”, since this is my last week in some time with a web connection of my own.) Dana Priest of the Washington Post continues to be the best U.S. reporter on this subject. Here’s her latest, (co-authored by Joe Stephens, at a link that does not require … Read more

Chalabi

So I come back from vacation to news reports that Chalabi may have been spying for Iran all along. Initial reaction: can this possibly be true? Responsible reaction: I should probably wait for a better sourced story or independent corroboration before I decide that it is. I’m not buying the angle that Iran wanted to … Read more