Pax-salon Mailing List: Fwd: Please consider signing on to our letter to Sen. Klobuchar re: John Brennan

[Patty Guerrero (pattypax]

HI,  I am forwarding a letter written by Mike Madden after we met w/the staff 
of Amy Klobuchar re. John Brennan's nomination for Dir. or the CIA.  If you 
would want to sign this letter, please respond to Mike Madden --- email:  mike 
[at] mudpuppies.net   and he can add your name (please tell him how you want 
your name spelled and signed) to the letter.   It has to be done soon.  (typos 
and etc, have been corrected on final letter, but it is the same letter).   

Thanks,

Patty

Begin forwarded message:

> February 19, 2013
>  
> Dear Senator Klobuchar,
>  
> Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the nomination of John O. Brennan
> to the office of Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Samuel Clark was
> thorough in making arrangements and professional in his facilitation. We
> were pleased to find some common ground with Brian Burton. He shared our
> concern that current drone strike practices are setting a worrisome
> precedent and we concur with him that a confirmation process presents an
> opportunity to move policy.
>  
> The Senate Intelligence Committee hearings did not change our view that
> Mr. Brennan is unfit to lead the CIA. In his various positions at the CIA and
> as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, he was in a position to
> be aware of the most egregious excesses in the prosecution of the "war on
> terror". Torture (euphemistically known as enhanced interrogation),
> extraordinary rendition, black prison sites, indefinite detention, and
> disregard for the Geneva Conventions were sanctioned at the highest levels
> of government. Indeed, he has publicly expressed support for "enhanced
> interrogation" and extraordinary rendition. We had hoped for a repudiation
> of these practices that we hold to be immoral, counterproductive, and
> illegal but it was not forthcoming.
>  
> It is a sad irony that President Obama has nominated John Brennan after
> asking the nation to look forward, not back, regarding torture.
>  
> Waterboarding is torture and waterboarding is prohibited by the Geneva
> Conventions. Under direct questioning by Senator Levin, Mr. Brennan refused
> to concede these two points. It is insufficient that he finds the practice
> reprehensible and would not allow it to occur under his watch. Such a
> promise, if broken, is not accountable under the law unless a rock-solid
> consensus is reestablished that waterboarding is torture. Mr. Brennan erodes
> that consensus.
>  
> Mr. Brennan's position on waterboarding begs additional questions. Which of
> the practices employed in the regime of "enhanced interrogations" does he
> consider to be torture and which are prohibited by the Geneva Conventions?
> Sleep deprivation? Beating? Mock execution? Stress positions? Exposure to
> extreme temperatures? Sensory deprivation? Isolation? Enclosure in tiny
> spaces? Forced nudity? Religious and sexual humiliation? More than 100
> detainees have died while in U.S. custody and at least 37 were classified by
> American medical examiners as homicide. Some, like the Afghan taxi driver
> Dilawar, were tortured to death. We renew our callthat those officials at
> the highest levels of government, who authorized and enabled the systematic
> practice of torture, be held accountable under the law. We demand that no
> American personnel of any service or agency, ever again exceed the approved
> interrogation techniques of the Army Field Manual under any circumstance. We
> must restore our reputation as a nation that adheres to the Geneva
> Conventions always, regardless of whom our enemy might be.
>  
> Questions regarding the Geneva Conventions are relevant because the CIA has
> exceeded its mandate as an intelligence gathering agency. Some refer to it's
> new role as paramilitary. We see firing a hellfire missile as a full-blown
> military operation. When it occurs in a country we are not at war with and
> against the will of that nation, it is an act of military aggression. The
> CIA must immediately cease any and all military functions.
>  
> We must also know, prior to confirmation, whether or not the CIA will
> continue the practice of extraordinary rendition. Innocent people like Maher
> Arar and Khaled el-Masri have been kidnapped and sent to countries where
> they were tortured. The practice is illegal, it harms America's reputation,
> and it must never occur again. Likewise, we must abandon the use of "black
> sites" and always allow the International Red Cross access to detention
> sites and to every person in our custody. Would Mr.Brennan concur?
>  
> As the chief counterterrorism advisor to President Obama, Mr. Brennan has
> been the person most responsible in the formulation and execution of the
> Administration's drone strike policy. It is ridiculous that the legal basis
> for the policy remains a secret. So are secret government lists of terrorist
> groups, "associated forces", and watched individuals. Compliance with the
> law is predicated upon everyone knowing what the law is. It is not
> sufficient that the legal memos be released to a few select members of
> Congress, who then in turn must keep them secret. All of the legal memos
> must be made public.
>  
> In advance of that release, we will say that we find the program in its
> entirety to be immoral and elements of it to be patently illegal, the
> existence of any secret legal memos notwithstanding. The "double tap"
> strikes, secondary strikes that kill rescuers and mourners of the initial
> strike, are clear and unambiguous violations of the Geneva Conventions.
> People lending assistance to the fallen are protected, regardless of their
> combatant status. Neither the "signature strikes", those that target people
> for suspicious patterns of behavior, nor the absurdly broad categorization
> of all military-age males as militants can be justified apart from a hot
> battlefield. Even there, a decision by the enemy to surrender must be
> respected whenever feasible. Drones afford no such opportunity to their
> victims.
>  
> While Mr. Brennan has described the drone strikes as proficient and precise,
> the numbers tell a different story. According to the Bureau of Investigative
> Journalism, since 2004, between 475 and 891 civilians have been killed and
> 176 are known to have been children.
>  
> In June of 2011, Mr. Brennan denied that there had been "a single collateral
> death" attributable to drone strikes in the preceding year. However, on
> March 11, 2011, a drone strike had killed 42 Pakistanis and most of them
> were known to be civilians. The strike had been widely reported and
> America's then- ambassador to Pakistan, Cameron Munter, had conveyed the
> nation's strong condemnation of the attack to the highest levels of the
> Obama Administration. It is implausible that Mr. Brennan would not have
> known of those civilian casualties.
>  
> When an American citizen is targeted for assassination, we reject that the
> Executive may act as judge, jury, and executioner. It has been suggested
> that oversight might be provided by a FISA-like secret court. While well
> intentioned, this measure would fall unacceptably short of the due process
> guarantees of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution. In
> particular, the right of the accused to be informed of criminal charges must
> be respected prior to the imposition of a death sentence. Additionally, the
> right to a public trial by jury, the right to counsel, and the right to
> confront adverse witness are not qualified in the Constitution. The
> government cannot act with lethal force against its own citizens unless an
> attack is imminent.
>  
> Therein lies the most pernicious element of the drone strike policy as we
> know it-the definition of imminence. The 16 page white paper, purported to
> closely track the legal memos authorizing drone strike assassination of
> American citizens, goes so far as to say that "the US government may not be
> aware of all al-Qaeda plots as they are developing and thus cannot be
> confident that none is about to occur; and that [...] the nation may have a
> limited window of opportunity within which to strike in a manner that both
> has a high likelihood of success and reduces the probability of American
> casualties." The paper conflates imminence with expedience. The road to
> tyranny is marked by secrecy, redefinition of well-understood words and
> principles, and rationed adherence to the law and the Constitution.
>  
> The focus on American citizens, while important, has been inordinate. We are
> members of a global community. The United States would do well to restate
> its commitment to respect the human rights of all people. The United Nations
> Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights must be our guide.
> Nobel Peace Prize laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu lent simple objectivity
> to the issue when he wrote; "Do the United States and its people really want
> to tell those of us who live in the rest of the world that our lives are not
> of the same value as yours? That President Obama can sign off on a decision
> to kill us with less worry about judicial scrutiny than if the target is an
> American?”
>  
> Fundamentally, we do not believe more killing, even that of known militants,
> is in any way helpful. The al-Qaeda leaders who were in place at the time of
> the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001 are all dead or captured. Yet
> by John Brennan's own assessment, al-Qaeda has metastasized in areas of the
> world it didn't previously exist. Membership in al-Qaeda in the Arabian
> Peninsula (AQAP) has more than tripled since drone strikes began in Yemen.
> The oft-repeated phrase "we're creating terrorists faster than we can kill
> them" has proven true. It is time to examine the grievances of the Muslim
> world and address those that are legitimate.
>  
> The legal basis for drone strikes outside of Afghanistan, the 2001
> Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), is increasingly strained. A
> recent Washington Post editorial read; "The further - in geography, time,
> and organizational authorization - that the drone war advances from the
> original al- Qaeda target in Afghanistan, the less validity it has under the
> 2001 congressional authorization...most of the world is unlikely to accept
> an argument that the September 11th,2001 attacks justify drone strikes a
> decade later in Northern Africa.". For reasons pragmatic, ethical, and
> legal, it is time to end violence and begin diplomacy with all parties.
>  
> It is useful to contrast the treatment received by CIA agents Jose Rodriguez
> and John Kiriakou. Mr.Rodriguez destroyed "enhanced interrogation" video
> tapes of two suspects that included waterboarding. The tapes were considered
> evidence of criminal wrongdoing and were reportedly destroyed in defiance of
> orders from then-CIA Director Porter Goss. Mr. Kiriakou on the other hand,
> blew the whistle on torture by the agency. He faced multiple charges, but
> plead guilty to a single count of passing classified information to the
> media in violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Mr.
> Kiriakou has been sentenced to 30 months in prison while Mr. Rodriguez was
> not disciplined. Would Mr. Brennan concur that justice has been turned
> upside down in this comparison?
>  
> Senator Klobuchar, we request that you work to deny the confirmation of John
> Brennan and employ the filibuster if necessary. We further request that the
> confirmation of any individual to head the CIA be conditioned on following:
>  
> 1. Release of all legal memos supporting the drone strike program to
> Congress and the public.
> 2. Release by the government of the number of known and estimated casualties
> resulting from drone strikes.
> 3. Release by the government of the criminal charge and rationale for the
> killing individuals whose identities were known prior to strike.
> 4. The grounding of all armed drones until a policy on their use is
> formulated, presented to the public, and passed into law.
> 5. Cessation of all military operations by the CIA.
> 6. A ban on assassination by the CIA.
> 7. Disclosure of the location of black prison sites and an end to their use.
> 8. An end to the practice of extraordinary rendition and an avenue of
> recourse for individuals previously rendered and tortured.
> 9. An end to the practice of "enhanced interrogation" and strict adherence
> to the practices permitted by the Army Field Manual and Geneva Conventions.
> 10. A policy with legal force must be in place to protect whistleblowers who
> expose serious wrongdoing within the agency.
>  
> We would appreciate your comment on each of the ten conditions. We are
> deeply concerned about the direction our country is heading. Thank you again
> for allowing us to share those concerns with your staff.
>  
> Sincerely,
> Mike Madden
> Ross and Coleen Rowley