« | »

NYT Cites Radical Leftist Report On 9/11 Torture

From the New York Times:

U.S. Practiced Torture After 9/11, Nonpartisan Review Concludes

By SCOTT SHANE | April 16, 2013

WASHINGTON — A nonpartisan, independent review of interrogation and detention programs in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks concludes that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that the nation’s highest officials bore ultimate responsibility for it.

The sweeping, 577-page report says that while brutality has occurred in every American war, there never before had been “the kind of considered and detailed discussions that occurred after 9/11 directly involving a president and his top advisers on the wisdom, propriety and legality of inflicting pain and torment on some detainees in our custody.” The study, by an 11-member panel convened by the Constitution Project, a legal research and advocacy group, is to be released on Tuesday morning…

It should probably go without saying that the ‘Constitution Project’ is another radical left front group funded by George Soros. The ‘Constitution Project’ works to undermine U.S. national security on constitutional grounds. It seeks to challenge the legality of military commissions, and end the detainment of "enemy combatants.” (See more background below.)

It also condemn government surveillance of terrorists. And it has recommended that foreign detainees (including suspected terrorists) should be released on American soil. In fact, the ‘Constitution Project’ works hand in hand with groups like the ACLU and People For The American Way to protect captured terrorists.

So naturally, the New York Times treats their "nonpartisan review" as an authoritative and unbiased report.

While the task force did not have access to classified records, it is the most ambitious independent attempt to date to assess the detention and interrogation programs. A separate 6,000-page report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s record by the Senate Intelligence Committee, based exclusively on agency records, rather than interviews, remains classified…

Why would they want the facts? They might get in the way of their analysis.

The use of torture, the report concludes, has “no justification” and “damaged the standing of our nation, reduced our capacity to convey moral censure when necessary and potentially increased the danger to U.S. military personnel taken captive.” The task force found “no firm or persuasive evidence” that these interrogation methods produced valuable information that could not have been obtained by other means. While “a person subjected to torture might well divulge useful information,” much of the information obtained by force was not reliable, the report says…

Unlike the Constitution Project’s material, which is highly reliable.

For the record, here is some more background on the Constitution Project, via Discover the Networks:


Works to undermine U.S. national security on constitutional grounds
Has recommended that foreign detainees (including suspected terrorists) should be released on American soil
Receives financial support from the Open Society Institute…

Much of CP’s work since September 11, 2001 has sought to challenge the legality of military commissions; end the detainment of "enemy combatants” (a term whose meaning CP says has become "overbroad"); condemn government surveillance of terrorists; and limit the President’s executive privileges.

While claiming to promote constitutional values, CP has repeatedly argued on behalf of enemy combatants whom it depicts as victims of American injustice. CP’s “Liberty and Security Committee” heads this initiative, which has led the organization to defend numerous confirmed terrorists.

In 2002, for instance, CP submitted an amicus brief for a case involving Khaled El-Masri, a violent German national with suspected ties to terrorist organizations. Another amicus brief was submitted in support of Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard and chauffeur, Salim Ahmed Hamdan. CP argued that Hamdan’s habeas corpus rights had been unconstitutionally denied and, more generally, that the military commission process was unjustifiable.

CP also filed several amicus briefs in support of Jose Padilla, an American Islamic convert with a violent history, who, according to CP, was being unlawfully detained. Arguing on similar grounds in a 2009 amicus brief, CP petitioned for a group of Uighur detainees at Guantanamo Bay to be released on American soil. In the 2010 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Obama, CP supported the plaintiffs who claimed that the U.S. government had unlawfully monitored them via wiretapping. In some cases, such as in al-Odah v. United States and Boumediene v. Bush, CP argued that it was illegal for the American government to detain terror suspects because the evidence against them had been obtained through “torture.” …

George Soros’s Open Society Institute has awarded grants yearly to CP since at least 2000; between 2000 and 2008, these grants totaled more than $1.8 million cumulatively…

You get the picture. But this is what the New York Times calls a ‘nonpartisan’ organization.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, April 16th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

One Response to “NYT Cites Radical Leftist Report On 9/11 Torture”

  1. Right of the People says:

    I agree, we should release them on American soil, specifically north of Fairbanks,. Alaska. Give them a bottle of water and a couple of MREs and tell them to enjoy themselves.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »