Obama's press conference could not have gone that well, because it is not on the front page of my Times. Ben Smith breaks news from WWII, however, on torture and Winston Churchill.
Here is the Times transcript. Their own Jeff Zeleney made news with a hard-hitting question about the Manhattan flyover... uhh, not exactly:
THE ONE: ...Jeff Zeleny.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.
The President was far too kind to answer that he was most enchanted by the Times probing, hard-hitting journalism.
Where is the video? I bet Zeleny looks enchanting with his skirt and pom-poms. Give him an "O" indeed... [I am looking for Zeleney in the video provided by The Captain.]
NOW WE KNOW WHY HE SENT BACK THE CHURCHILL BUST:
Ben Smith at The Politico busts Obama for self-deception on torture:
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. You've said in the past that waterboarding in your opinion is torture. And torture is a violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions. Do you believe that the previous administration sanctioned torture?
MR. OBAMA: What I've said -- and I will repeat -- is that waterboarding violates our ideals and our values. I do believe that it is torture. I don't think that's just my opinion; that's the opinion of many who've examined the topic. And that's why I put an end to these practices.
I am absolutely convinced that it was the right thing to do -- not because there might not have been information that was yielded by these various detainees who were subjected to this treatment, but because we could have gotten this information in other ways -- in ways that were consistent with our values, in ways that were consistent with who we are.
I was struck by an article that I was reading the other day talking about the fact that the British, during World War II, when London was being bombed to smithereens, had 200 or so detainees. And Churchill said, "we don't torture," when the -- the entire British -- all of the British people were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat. And -- and -- and the reason was that Churchill understood, you start taking shortcuts, and over time, that corrodes what's -- what's best in a people.
That almost surely comes from Andrew Sullivan; the article that should have inspired the return of the bust is from the 2005 Guardian:
The London Cage was run by MI19, the section of the War Office responsible for gleaning information from enemy prisoners of war, and few outside this organisation knew exactly what went on beyond the single barbed-wire fence that separated the three houses from the busy streets and grand parks of west London.
...
By examining thousands of documents stored at the National Archives, formerly the Public Record Office, as well as the archives of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva, the Guardian has established what happened to this prisoner, and many others like him.
The London Cage was used partly as a torture centre, inside which large numbers of German officers and soldiers were subjected to systematic ill-treatment. In total 3,573 men passed through the Cage, and more than 1,000 were persuaded to give statements about war crimes. The brutality did not end with the war, moreover: a number of German civilians joined the servicemen who were interrogated there up to 1948.
...
Within the National Archives are documents from two official inquiries into the methods employed at the Cage, one which heard evidence that guards were under orders to knock on some prisoners' cell doors every 15 minutes, depriving them of sleep, and another which concluded with "the possibility that violence was used" during interrogations.
There is also a long and detailed letter of complaint from one SS captain, Fritz Knoechlein, who describes his treatment after being taken to the Cage in October 1946. Knoechlein alleges that because he was "unable to make the desired confession" he was stripped, given only a pair of pyjama trousers, deprived of sleep for four days and nights, and starved.
The guards kicked him each time he passed, he alleges, while his interrogators boasted that they were "much better" than the "Gestapo in Alexanderplatz". After being forced to perform rigorous exercises until he collapsed, he says he was compelled to walk in a tight circle for four hours. On complaining to Scotland that he was being kicked even "by ordinary soldiers without a rank", Knoechlein alleges that he was doused in cold water, pushed down stairs, and beaten with a cudgel. Later, he says, he was forced to stand beside a large gas stove with all its rings lit before being confined in a shower which sprayed extremely cold water from the sides as well as from above. Finally, the SS man says, he and another prisoner were taken into the gardens behind the mansions, where they were forced to run in circles while carrying heavy logs.
"Since these tortures were the consequences of my personal complaint, any further complaint would have been senseless," Knoechlein wrote. "One of the guards who had a somewhat humane feeling advised me not to make any more complaints, otherwise things would turn worse for me." Other prisoners, he alleged, were beaten until they begged to be killed, while some were told that they could be made to disappear.
Churchill tortured Germans, Roosevelt interned Japanese-Americans, yet we endure. Is the Guardian account plausible? I suppose we could compare this to British treatment of the IRA. FWIW, the commander of The Cage, Alexander Scotland, received a decoration from the Us and was never prosecuted by the British.
As to Sullivan's sense of history and ability to provide objective research, well, it's too bad no one alleged that Winston Churchill was the secret father of Trig Palin...
Perhaps we should comment on what has enchanted us.
I can't really think of anything off the top of my head...
Posted by: Jane | April 30, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Zeleny should be embarassed. Instead, he'll probably do a round on MSNBC and CNN talking head shows.
Posted by: Elroy Jetson | April 30, 2009 at 11:23 AM
That's the kind of hard hitting question I'd expect Baghdad Bob (or Eason Jordan) to ask Saddam Hussein.
Posted by: RichatUF | April 30, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Is Obama just Zack Effron in a suit?
Posted by: roux | April 30, 2009 at 11:36 AM
A TM classic:
"The President was far too kind to answer that he was most enchanted by the Times probing, hard-hitting journalism.
Where is the video? I bet Zeleny looks enchanting with his skirt and pom-poms. Give him an "O" indeed..."
What's the theme song here ."Don't know much about his-to-ry"?
Anyone alive who served in battle in WWII knows this guy is a stupid moron.
And relying on Sully? I'm persuaded that all his pro war stuff was based on some game in his head where he played with muscular saintly tin soldiers on the floor of some nursery while sipping hot chocolate and nibbling on biscuits with nanny.
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Jane:
Perhaps we should comment on what has enchanted us.
When Obama went to France, I was enchanted with Carla Bruni.
Posted by: hit and run | April 30, 2009 at 11:49 AM
Carla may be coming to a YouTube near you if those stolen tapes are not ransomed... or even if they are.
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 11:55 AM
If the White House and its press corps last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their phoniest hour".
Posted by: Paul Zrimsek | April 30, 2009 at 11:56 AM
What was the really stupid thing Dan Rather said to the Clintons? Something about wanting to be 1/100 as great as them....
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM
BTW, I sent this yesterday to the AF office that deals with liaison with Hollywood and haven't received a response:
"There's a great deal of speculation involving this week's trip with fighter escort(s) of AF2 down the Hudson. Was your office involved in any way in this? If so, who requested your assistance? Who authorized it? Which civilians, if any, were aboard the crafts for the flight? What records do you have to support any information you supply in response to this request? Will you make them available without a FOIA request? "
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Can't argue the point, Hit about Bruni, hope you didn't think I was being too cavalier in the penultimate thread, but
they really shouldn't let him out in public,
no I think that's it.
Posted by: narciso | April 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM
TM, you are a mag bast!!!!!
The real problem with these jerks, including our current occupant of the Oval Office, is that they have not a clue about History.
And as I've said before, when you compare the WOT under the Bushies to other conflicts of its size and scope, the amazing thing is how LITTLE abuse took place.
Posted by: verner | April 30, 2009 at 12:02 PM
What a joke. The media lap dogs will do anything to cover for the Leader.
They left so many obvious follow up questions 'unasked.' They truly embarrassed themselves.
http://firstconservative.com/blog/conservative-blogs/obama-press-conference-unasked-questions
Posted by: MAS1916 | April 30, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Ed Morrissey has the clip from Enchanted with Amy Adams singing "That's how you know...he loves you..."
Such a sweet song and great scene in the movie, I hate to see it associated with BFFs Zero and Zeleny. But it's pretty perfect for the occasion.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 30, 2009 at 12:10 PM
narciso:
hope you didn't think I was being too cavalier in the penultimate thread
No, no not at all.
Posted by: hit and run | April 30, 2009 at 12:10 PM
So within one week you have called one of our lead FBI guys tracking down Osama, Mr. Soufan, a liar, and accepted at face value the words of an SS Captain.
Nice work.
Posted by: Martin | April 30, 2009 at 12:13 PM
Powerline:
[[[ Recall that Obama returned a bust of Churchill that the British government had loaned to the White House. At the time, the Telegraph noted, by way of possible explanation, that "It was during Churchill's second premiership that Britain suppressed Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion. Among Kenyans allegedly tortured by the colonial regime included one Hussein Onyango Obama, the President's grandfather." ]]]
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/04/023457.php
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Didn't Baba Walters seep treacle all over a presidential interview(I think with Clinton) with something like "be kind to us, Mr. President"?
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 12:28 PM
The Guardian began as a socialist paper, The Manchester Guardian, and was co-opted by communists. It is probably the least credible of all papers, which is saying a lot these days. The people who currently own it, "their group," is made up of contacts who were tight with Kim Philby. That should tell you all you need to know.
Posted by: Michael Spurlock | April 30, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Say, didn't Obambi send the Churchill bust back to England, even after they said "you sure you don't want to keep it?"
Posted by: William Teach | April 30, 2009 at 12:34 PM
-So within one week you have called one of our lead FBI guys tracking down Osama, Mr. Soufan, a liar, and accepted at face value the words of an SS Captain.
Nice work.-
So the left now takes whatever the FBI says as gospel?
And if you'll read TM's post rather than just being a consumate horse's ass he asks whether the Guardian's account is plausible.
We do know however that a good number of you dumbasses have accepted at face value the word's of Osama's troops.
Nice work indeed, ass.
Posted by: Ignatz | April 30, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Soufan, 'admitted' to Isikoff that his account of the Abu Zubeydah interrogations in the New York Times op ed was incomplete. I put that in quotes, because I don't put too much stock in Isikoff either, at least since the 'Koran in the toilet story', if not earlier. The account is from theNational
Archives, so if you have an argument take it up with them. The Guardian was willing to take the word of the Tipton 3, although
a new type of lie detector found at least one had lied about the extent of his terrorist training.
Posted by: narciso | April 30, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Torture has been with us for 5,000 years. One form of it is bullying. Another is terrorism. It's goal is to induce terror and fear and ignores the rules of combat. These all coerce the individual through violence.
State sponsored terror has been an instrument of policy by nations throughout history. Think about the mutually assured destruction policies of the United States and the Soviet Union or most nuclear policy today. Nukes can be used tactically but are not tactical.Once the trigger is pulled, fear and the potential for annihilation are unleashed on us all.
So it is in fact relative.Do we sacrifice the civil rights of an individual to protect the masses or go quietly into the night? Do we authorize certain individuals to carefully weigh the pros and cons and the consequences, or do we cover our eyes and ears and say nothing and wait for the consequences?
Torture, safe, legal, and rare.
Posted by: matt | April 30, 2009 at 12:57 PM
British torture of the Mau Mau's was extensive and in direct reaction to the Mau Mau's own theretofore unheard of brutality. They had a habit of hacking isolated farm families and their staffs to death and doing all sorts of insane things during and afterwards. Best left to the imagination.
The leader of the Mau Mau's was Jomo Kenyatta, who became a symbol of African freedom and lifetime president of Kenya. Perhaps the president might want to read a little history. His own grandfather could have been a terrorist.
Posted by: matt | April 30, 2009 at 01:06 PM
The great anthropologist Lewis Leakey grew up with the Kikuyu and invented the system for breaking the MauMaus. It did not involve torture. It involved forcing them to undertake a de-cursing ceremony to undo the MauMau pledge they's taken under pain of death. I remember him describing it to me (and my classmates)when I was a college freshman.If we tried such a thing today on the jihadis --well, can you imagine?
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 01:15 PM
So, tell me, why does Martin read JOM?
Posted by: sbw | April 30, 2009 at 01:26 PM
'cause we're so cute, sbw.
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 01:27 PM
The Mau Mau's were basically animists as well, Clarice, so not sure how it would play out with Muslim fanatics. Part of the Mau Mau initiation ritual was the repudiation of Western values. The initiations were so horrific that the shame instilled in most of them also ensured loyalty.As the fanatic quotient ratchets up, so do the measures required to combat it.
Posted by: matt | April 30, 2009 at 01:39 PM
"it's too bad no one alleged that Winston Churchill was the secret father of Trig Palin..."
Hey, why not? As of a few days ago, the Washington Post's media columnist, Howie Kurtz, was still pushing the "fake turkey" meme. It's not as if the "layers of editors and fact checkers" seem to catch these factually-challenged assertions.
Posted by: Bruce Rheinstein | April 30, 2009 at 01:41 PM
Roosevelt interned Japanese-Americans, yet we endure.
Let's not forget FDR also executed german saboteurs who hadn't actually sabotaged anything yet after setting up speedy show trials where their guilt was a foregone conclusion (and one of them was an american citizen)
Posted by: jr565 | April 30, 2009 at 02:03 PM
Actually,strictly on the quiet,Prince Charles is Trig's father.
Posted by: PeterUK | April 30, 2009 at 02:09 PM
I don't believe that for a moment PUK. Trig is far too attractive and smart to have been sired by Prince Chuck.
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 02:12 PM
I am not so sure the initiations were that horrific, but those who undertook it --often under threat of beatings or death--believed that if they broke away they would die from having dishonored the pledge which is why Leakey's counter initiation , breaking that oath, worked.
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 02:13 PM
Prince Charles is Trig's father.
Judging from appearances, I'm not convinced that Prince Charles is Prince William's father!
Posted by: Bruce Rheinstein | April 30, 2009 at 02:15 PM
Well, technically the letter from the SS captain doesn't confirm that Churchill tortured. He wasn't brought there until 1946, and Churchill was given "the order of the boot" from a grateful British citizenry in 1945.
Posted by: JSR | April 30, 2009 at 02:16 PM
So you're saying the sainted socialist Atlee was the real culprit JSR. Wow, that's even better.
Although Fox just reported that Churchill did indeed approve enhanced interrogation techniques. So there...
Posted by: verner | April 30, 2009 at 02:25 PM
Clarice;
did you ever read Robert Ruark? His "Something of Value" did an excellent job in describing the Emergency. The Mau Mau rituals are accurately described in the wikipedia article on the Mau Mau.
Posted by: matt | April 30, 2009 at 02:29 PM
Oh hell, everyone knows Michelle Osama is Trigs father.
OsamaHusseinIslamObama 2012'
(the terrorist/pirates choice)
-It's never to early to campaign-
Posted by: Swamp Rabbit | April 30, 2009 at 02:32 PM
No--I'll look but I read a scholarly account which was sceptical of the more gruesome (naturally second hand) accounts.
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 02:36 PM
Gotcha!
People's choice of Tim Geithner among the most beautiful is now solved.
His brother is a V.P.!!! How "transparent."
LUN
Posted by: centralcal | April 30, 2009 at 02:52 PM
Anyone with even a basic knowledge of Irish history would not have used Churchill as an example of exemplary behavoir. Churchill created the Black and Tans, who were to the Irish of 1920 comparable to what the Gestapo were to the Jews of Europe 20 years later.
http://tinyurl.com/dx4v9e
Posted by: DanG | April 30, 2009 at 02:56 PM
Don't forget that every official involved with the Japanese-American internment had decided by early 1944 that they were not a security risk and should be released, but Roosevelt would not release them until after the 1944 election. He was willing to keep thousands of innocent people interred for months for purely political reasons.
Posted by: ROA | April 30, 2009 at 02:56 PM
DanG, exactly, Obama's crack historians never heard of Operation Demetrius, Operation Flavius or Loughgall either.
He and others mistake the Brit's civility and elegant rhetoric for a passive ethos; an assumption many have lived to regret.
Posted by: BJM | April 30, 2009 at 05:07 PM
Worse, he succeeded in getting them interned only because his Solicitor General lied to the SCOTUS, claiming they were a security threat when there was no evidence for that and FBI director Hoover disputed that.
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 05:08 PM
And what was dear ole J. Edgar wearing during the dispute?
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 06:03 PM
Has there ever been a definitive biography on J. Edgar? There's a commie and lowlife hating part of me that prefers to think of him positively, but some of the things like what bad alludes to are just flat-out weird. Not that there's anything wrong with it and not that it necessarily impaired his performance on the job. I'm thinking Clarice might have some telling anecdotes....
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 30, 2009 at 06:22 PM
Captain, I was being snarky on little evidence. According to Wiki, there is only one person offering that sort of story.
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 07:13 PM
Holy mother. ABC has outed the CIA's interrogation specialists. Pictures and all. OMG. OMG. I am speechless.
Posted by: Sue | April 30, 2009 at 07:36 PM
Sue, that story says KSM was waterboarded 183 times. Brian Ross needs to catch up.
I hope these guys are gonna be safe. They have a target on their back now.
Posted by: bad | April 30, 2009 at 07:42 PM
I can't even formulate anything terrible enough to say about them outing these 2 men. And a man that did nothing but misremember something was ruined for outing a desk jockey with a big mouthed husband.
Posted by: Sue | April 30, 2009 at 07:46 PM
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 30, 2009 at 09:42 PM
"And a man that did nothing but misremember something was ruined for outing a desk jockey with a [low level] big mouthed husband."
There - fixed that for ya Sue - it pisses him off.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | April 30, 2009 at 10:00 PM
Well if he only took credit for what he had accomplished, where would that leave him, Cecil?
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 10:00 PM
Clarice
In Chicago, as a 'community activist, trying to get into HLS.
Cheers
Posted by: J.M. Heinrichs | May 01, 2009 at 07:00 PM
Clarice -
My ex-father-in-law (now deceased) was FBI, and posted to California before Pearl Harbor. He insisted that there were Japanese spies among the Japanese-American population, that the FBI had some under surveillance before the war started, but the FBI was concerned there were more unidentified. I don't know that he thought the internment itself was a good idea, though.
Related event - the Niihau Incident:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niihau_Incident
Posted by: Jack Okie | May 02, 2009 at 04:36 PM