State Secrets

There might be reasons, legitimate reasons, why the Obama administration used the same defense originally raised by the Bush administration in the Ninth Circuit case brought by five victims of post-911 extraordinary rendition. Let's remember what extraordinary rendition is: kidnapping a person, stripping them of their identity and clothing, sometimes beating or drugging them, flying them to a secret prison either under the control of the United States or one of our more brutal allies, and then keeping them in a secret site for "enhanced interrogation," i.e. torture at the hands of CIA, military, or some of the thugs hired by our government or a brutal ally.

The defense raised by Bush and by Obama was the same: state secrets.

Read about the Ninth Circuit case at the ACLU website.

President Obama did on day three of his administration issue executive orders suspending military commissions, holding interrogations to the US Army Field Manual, and ordering Guantanamo Bay prison closed within the year.

That was good. But why did the Obama Department of Justice continue the state secrets defense? Watch Ben Wizner from the ACLU for his explanation on Rachel Maddow last night.

OK, Eric Holder's confirmation as attorney general was held up. That might have delayed a thorough review of all pending cases.

But I don't understand why the Department of Justice didn't ask for an adjournment rather than use state secrets as a defense to allegations of kidnapping, torture, and maiming of foreign nationals caught up in the Bush "war on terror."

I am hoping that as each of the Bush policies gets reviewed, things will change. I'm hoping. I'm still hoping.