February 02, 2009

Change you can believe in

It's funny enough that Mr. "Change You Can Believe In" has no hassle with continuing the practice of rendition -- funneling captured terror suspects off to a third nation where they might be "abused" -- but look at how the "progressive" Human Rights Watch has changed its tune about rendition ... now that The Messiah has:

"Under limited circumstances, there is a legitimate place for renditions," said Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch. "What I heard loud and clear from the president's order was that they want to design a system that doesn't result in people being sent to foreign dungeons to be tortured -- but that designing that system is going to take some time."

Malinowski said he had urged the Obama administration to stipulate that prisoners could be transferred only to countries where they would be guaranteed a public hearing in an official court. "Producing a prisoner before a real court is a key safeguard against torture, abuse and disappearance," Malinowski said. (emphasis added). (Source.)

Just to show you how vehemently opposed to rendition HRW was when GW Bush was in office:

The US government should:

Repudiate the use of rendition to torture as a counterterrorism tactic and permanently discontinue the CIA's rendition program;

Disclose the identities, fate, and current whereabouts of all persons detained by the CIA or rendered to foreign custody by the CIA since 2001, including detainees who were rendered to Jordan;

Repudiate the use of "diplomatic assurances" against torture and ill-treatment as a justification for the transfer of a suspect to a place where he or she is at risk of such abuse;

Make public any audio recordings or videotapes that the CIA possesses of interrogations of detainees rendered by the CIA to foreign custody;

Provide appropriate compensation to all persons arbitrarily detained by the CIA or rendered to foreign custody (emphasis added).

HRW also demanded, during the Bush admin., that other countries "refuse to cooperate in secret detention and rendition efforts."

Probably the most telling part is where, under Bush, HRW denounced even "diplomatic assurances" by foreign governments regarding rendition; yet, now under Obama HRW is fine with prisoners sent overseas being "guaranteed a public hearing in an official court." What's the substantial difference between "diplomatic assurances" and "foreign guarantees?" Semantics is all, I'm afraid.

Change Hypocrisy you can believe in.

Posted by Hube at February 2, 2009 04:58 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

See, it's a kindler, gentler CIA now that Obama is in charge. Oh, and I'm sure the kindler, gentler IRS won't be doing taxpayer audits any more, because those are mean and anti-worker.

Posted by: G Rex at February 3, 2009 09:37 AM