Obama Resisting Push for Interrogation Panel

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/us/politics/24cong.html?scp=1&sq=Obama%20Resisting%20Push%20for%20Interrogation%20Panel&st=Search

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 8:39 AM
Subject: re: Obama Resisting Push for Interrogation Panel
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   In 1989, the United States signed and ratified the UN Protocols on Torture. If president Obama finds that complying with this treaty by investigating and prosecuting torture conflicts with his initiatives going forward, it is his initiatives that have to make room. As professor Obama taught thousands of us, our treaty obligations are the "supreme law in the land"; they are not contingent on political convenience.  Investigating and prosecuting torture is not only required, it is not only right. It will advance president Obama's initiatives going forward. After all, any nation would have to be delusional to sign new treaties or accords with the United States as long as we oppose enforcing the treaties we have already ratified.

Barry Levine

Any Indictment of Interrogation Policy Makers Would Face Several Hurdles

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/us/politics/23legal.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=charlie%20savage&st=cse

- Hide quoted text -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:09 AM
Subject: re: Any Indictment of Interrogation Policy Makers Would Face Several Hurdles
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   Mr. Savage takes us through the looking glass to a realm where torturers aren't culpable because they acted on legal counsel and lawyers aren't culpable because they didn't torture. Presto! No one is responsible for anything--except for Article II, section three of our constitution that holds the president of the United States responsible to " take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed".  Even if the circular logic of the Bush regime can absolve both the torturers and those who sanctioned their torture, responsibility ultimately rests with the chief executive.

Barry Levine

Obama Won’t Bar Inquiry, or Penalty, on Interrogations

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22intel.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=obama%20won't%20bar%20inquiry&st=cse

- Hide quoted text -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Subject: re: Obama Won’t Bar Inquiry, or Penalty, on Interrogations
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

    At Nuremberg, The U.S. argued that culpability for crimes against humanity attaches at all levels, from the guard who held the whip to the chancellor who set the policy, and to everyone in between.  The civilized world still embraces that standard. The president of the United States has the constitutional power to pardon those convicted of crimes if he/she feels that punishing them does not serve the nation's interest. The president has no proper role in blocking the investigation and prosecution of those crimes. In fact, we are bound by our treaties to investigate and prosecute or extradite. Let Mr. Obama pardon torturers if he feels it is in the nation's interest. Let him end the cover-up of crimes committed by the Bush administration; it is not in the nation's interest.

Barry Levine

Interrogation Memos Detail Harsh Tactics by the C.I.A.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/us/politics/17detain.html?hp

- Hide quoted text -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Subject: re: Interrogation Memos Detail Harsh Tactics by the C.I.A.
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   It would be innovative to absolve torturers of guilt because they were ignorant of the law. To absolve them because they proceeded on bad legal advice seems to be a distinction without a difference. However that plays out in our own courts, our treaty obligations remain the "supreme law of the Land". As signatory to the 1984 Conventions on Torture, we are obligated to charge and try or extradite those who violated our treaty obligations. I am embarrassed that our own department of State has intimidated a Spanish Court into blocking the trial of the "Bush Six". It would be a stupid use of scarce diplomatic capital to engage in a broad cover-up of the crimes of the last administration.

Barry Levine

Iraq Provinces Try to Overcome Political Disarray

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/world/middleeast/16province.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=sectarianism%20stalls%20efforts&st=cse

- Hide quoted text -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Subject: re: Iraq Provinces Try to Overcome Political Disarray
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

    In 2007 under cover of the Surge, the Bush administration reversed course on Iraq. We began to build, arm and empower sectarian militias at the expense of non-sectarian national institutions. Predictably, this has not led to a smooth integration of the provinces into a peaceful unified state; the U.S. forces are called on it intervene between the factions. Barring partition of the country, this policy will lead either to an indefinite U.S. presence to keep peace, or to bloody civil war. If the Obama administration means to honor its campaign rhetoric of withdrawal from Iraq, it must reverse this Bush-era policy of arming sectarian militias there. If it ever means to find an exit from Afghanistan, it will refrain from making the same mistake in that country.

Barry Levine

In Minnesota, a Battle Without End for a Senate Seat

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/us/politics/15minn.html?ref=todayspaper

- Hide quoted text -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Subject: re: In Minnesota, a Battle Without End for a Senate Seat
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   Months pass, and still the U.S. Senate operates short-handed.  Now that the Minnesota court has denied his appeal, Norm Coleman must choose between his loyalty to the party-of-no and his loyalty to his constituents, who deserve a senator. The process and the finding of the court are both evidently impartial. To further impede the functioning of our government for partisan ends is petulant at best. 

   Ultimately, all states should establish procedures to resolve votes that are closer than the margin of confidence. For now, the people of Minnesota are unlikely to reward senator Coleman's tantrum.

Barry Levine

Hamas Comes Out of Hiding

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13mcgeough.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=hamas%20comes%20out&st=cse

- Hide quoted text -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine <levinebar@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:19 AM
Subject: re: Hamas Comes Out of Hiding
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   Mr. McGeough's letter is ambiguous. Is "Watch what we do, not what we say" a quote from Mr. Mishal, or is it conjecture that Mr. McGeough puts into the latter's mouth? If it is a quote, Mr. Mishal has refused any role in peace talks; the substance of peace talks is "what we say" and that, we are told means nothing. If Mr. McGeough has been putting his own words into Mr. Mishal's mouth, Mr. Mishal deserves the opportunity to make himself clear.

Barry Levine