Community | July 30, 2010 | 64 comments

Obama Administration In Danger Of Establishing "New Normal" With Worst Bush-Era Policies, Says ACLU

Image
ScottyT
July 29, 2010
Group Releases 18-Month Review Of President's National Security Policies And Civil Liberties

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

NEW YORK – The Obama administration has repudiated some of the Bush administration's most egregious national security policies but is in danger of institutionalizing others permanently into law, thereby creating a troubling "new normal," according to a new report released today by the American Civil Liberties Union.

"Establishing a New Normal: National Security, Civil Liberties, and Human Rights Under the Obama Administration," an 18-month review of the Obama administration's record on national security issues affecting civil liberties, concludes that the current administration's record on issues of national security and civil liberties is decidedly mixed: President Obama has made great strides in some areas, such as his auspicious first steps to categorically prohibit torture, outlaw the CIA's use of secret overseas detention sites and release the Bush administration's torture memos, but he has failed to eliminate some of the worst policies put in place by President Bush, such as military commissions and indefinite detention. He has also expanded the Bush administration's "targeted killing" program.

The 22-page report, which was researched and written by staff in the ACLU's National Security Project and Washington Legislative Office, reviews the administration's record in the areas of transparency, torture and accountability, detention, targeted killing, military commissions, speech and surveillance and watchlists.

"President Obama began his presidency with a bang, signing executive orders that placed the power of the presidency behind the restoration of the rule of law and gave meaning to the president's stated view that America must lead with its values," said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. "Unfortunately, since that time, the administration has displayed a decidedly mixed record resulting, on a range of issues, in the very real danger that the Obama administration will institutionalize some of the most troublesome policies of the previous administration – in essence, creating a troubling 'new normal.' We strongly urge the president to shift course and renew his commitment to the fundamental values that are the very foundation of our nation's strength and security."

According to the ACLU's report, the first 18 months of Obama's presidency have been marked by a pattern wherein significant achievements for civil liberties have often been followed by setbacks. For instance, the positive step of releasing Justice Department memoranda that purported to authorize the Bush administration's torture regime was followed by the troubling decision to fight the release of photos depicting the abuse of prisoners in CIA custody. The administration's commitment to dismantle Guantánamo has been undermined by its assertion of the authority to detain people indefinitely without charge or trial. And prohibitions against torture have been weakened by the failure to hold top Bush administration officials accountable for their role in the torture program.

"The Obama administration should work with Congress to restore the rule of law, and discourage any legislation that would institutionalize policies that were widely regarded as unlawful under President Bush. Together, Congress and the White House should make sure that abuses of power like the Patriot Act are dismantled, not extended, and that policies like indefinite detention are never signed into law," said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "It is not too late for President Obama to build a legacy of justice and fairness."

The report concludes that, in addition to the initial executive orders, the administration has taken other positive steps and made genuine progress in some areas such as improvements to the government's handling of Freedom of Information Act requests, the release of key documents related to the U.S. torture program and an executive order disavowing torture. It also addresses more troubling practices such as the use of the "state secrets" doctrine to block lawsuits brought by torture survivors, the revival of the discredited military commissions to prosecute some Guantánamo detainees, the assertion of broad surveillance powers and the authorization of a "targeted killing" program to kill terrorism suspects, including American citizens, wherever they are located, without due process.

"In its first days, the Obama administration took some important steps to restore civil liberties and the rule of law," said Jameel Jaffer, Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU. "It has not, however, abandoned the 'global war' framework that was the basis for many of the last administration's counterterrorism programs. Indeed, some of the Obama administration's policies – like the policies on indefinite detention, military commissions and targeted killings – are entrenching this framework, presenting a profound threat to human rights and the rule of law. We urge the Obama administration to recommit itself to the ideals it articulated in its very first days. President Obama should not make 'global war' the new normal."

"Establishing a New Normal" is available online at:

www.aclu.org/national-security/establishing-new-normal
  1. groups:
    Community,   Current Tonight,   US Politics,   Progressive America,   3 more
  2. tags:
    Obama,  Bush,  Torture,  Constitution,  4 more
  3.     
    |

64 comments // Obama Administration In Danger Of Establishing "New Normal" With Worst Bush-Era Policies, Says ACLU

  • hunzedog
    • +2
      hunzedog  

    • we should trun the country by computer...think of all the money we could save.............we dont need representatives anymore when we can represent
      ourselves.....its bound to happen

    • 1 year ago
  • ThakurSherSinghParmar
    • +1
      ThakurSherSinghParmar  
    • Image

    • OBAMA MUST SHOW THE REAL COURAGE AND THE REAL STATESPERSONSHIP BY "eliminating some of the worst policies put in place by President Bush, such as military commissions and indefinite detention and the Bush administration's "targeted killing" program......." IF OBAMA REALLY WISHED TO MAKE THE 21st CENTURY THE CENTURY OF THE REAL PEACE...........!

    • 1 year ago
  • jubal
    • +2
      jubal  

    • Libertarians are just as much to blame as Tea Bagger and Right Wing nit wits like Beck in destroying our country and ushering in the police state.

    • 1 year ago
  • Progresshiv
    • +5
      Progresshiv  

    • The general public's bland acceptance of the new police state is beyond disheartening. This country is no longer the republic which was established in 1789.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • jubal
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • Image

    • -red neck jokes dedicated to the deeply emotional friendship between mike shanklin and scotty troll

      from, Radioactive Liberty.com, http://radioactiveliberty.com/jeff-foxworthy-parody-you-may-be-a-terrorist/

      -If you don’t think that abortion is a better form of contraception than a condom, you might be a terrorist.

      -If Paul Begala believes you’re a wimpy, whiny, weasel, you might be a terrorist.

      -If you’ve ever served your country as a member of the armed forces, you might be a terrorist.

      -If you’re a guy and have never tea bagged another guy or visa versa, you might be a terrorist.

      -If you think that 535 lobotomized, white lab rats would have a better grasp on reality than Congress, you might be a terrorist.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • +5
      iamaman  

    • here's a more objective and concise article.

      from: http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2009/0511_counterterrorism_anderson.aspx

      Counterterrorism and American Statutory Law | Number 9

      "Targeted Killing in U.S. Counterterrorism Strategy and Law"

      Legal Architecture for the War on Terror, Justice and Law, U.S. Congress, Executive Branch, U.S. Judiciary, Kenneth Anderson, Professor of Law, Washington College of Law, American University, The Brookings Institution, Georgetown University Law Center and the Hoover Institution

      "At this moment in which many policymakers, members of Congress and serious observers see primarily a need to roll back policies and assertions of authority made by the Bush Administration, any call for the Obama Administration and Congress to insist upon powers of unilateral targeted killing and to claim a zone of authority outside of armed conflict governed by IHL that even the Bush Administration did not claim must seem at once atavistic, eccentric, myopic and perverse. Many will not much care that such legal authority already exists in international and U.S. domestic law. Yet the purpose of this chapter is to suggest that, on the contrary, the uses to which the Obama Administration seeks to put targeted killing are proper, but they will require that it carefully preserve and defend legal authorities it should not be taking for granted and that its predecessors, including the Bush Administration, have not adequately preserved for their present day uses."

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • -1
      ScottyT  
    • iamaman:

      I got you biting tonight! I'm just loving the way I have you looking up all kinds of things to put down the libertarians. Hopefully, you spent numerous hours looking for more sources than a Brookings Institute report--anyone with half a brain knows what angle they're coming from.

      Keep on posting, Iamaman. I'll keep laughing at you.

    • 1 year ago
  • quadrius4
    • +2
      quadrius4  
    • iamaman:

      it's so beautiful to hit the university database and find information. I read the "new normal" article, scrolled down all the while wondering wether or not Obama was viewed as within his boundaries for "targeted killing" operations. What do I find? Your post.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • ScottyT:

      sorry to keep you waiting. i hope you dont stay up all day waiting for me to post. cuz its seems you have a lot of time on your hands. are you like scottytroll where you both like to troll on he internet while on the clock? or is it that you are both being paid to troll? scratchytroll kind of said he was too.

    • 1 year ago
  • bailey78
  • NuclearLullaby
    • +7
      NuclearLullaby  

    • Well...Here's a shocking no duh for everyone!!! No matter who's in the white house, they will ALWAYS have a few things in common with past leaders!!! Good or bad??? Well...I'll let you form your own opinions there!!! I DO however think MOST people now feel the Iraq war was a HUGE mistake!!! OH!!! & Yeah... If you are someone who likes freedom then we NEED to get the Patriot act abolished!!! Believe it or not the current recession was totally George Bush's fault!!! Say what you wish there,but it's not too hard to find the idiots in politics these days!!!

    • 1 year ago
  • bailey78
  • ayipis
  • shanklinmike
  • im1mjrpain
  • Idoknow19
    • +5
      Idoknow19  

    • I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with those who think that Libertarians are the only conceivable political moderates.

      As a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, I am having a hard time wrapping my head around why President Obama refuses to do away with the more egregious components of Bush intelligence policy. I think the beltway political culture is so ingrained into the industrial-military complex that they really, truly believe in these "necessary evils".

      There's a level of paranoia in DC right now that is simply unhealthy, on both sides of the aisle.

    • 1 year ago
  • libertyforall
    • +2
      libertyforall  
    • Idoknow19:

      We libertarians are not political moderates. We do not sacrifice our principles to become part of the oligarchy.

      We are extreme in our beliefs in the defense of liberty. Nothing wrong with that.

    • 1 year ago
  • Idoknow19
  • libertyforall
    • 0
      libertyforall  
    • Idoknow19:

      I guess it depends. If the LP started promoting principles that are against my core beliefs I'd abandon them in a second. I don't necessarily support the party as much as I support the beliefs they represent.

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
    • 0
      shanklinmike  
    • Idoknow19:

      "If you want government to intervene domestically, you're a liberal. If you want government to intervene overseas, you're a conservative. If you want government to intervene everywhere, you're a moderate. If you don't want government to intervene anywhere, you're an extremist." – Joseph Sobran

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • -1
      iamaman  
    • shanklinmike:

      was Joseph Sobran an Anti-Semite?

      from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Sobran#National_Review_Controversy

      -Political philosophy-

      Through much of his career, Sobran identified as a paleoconservative and supported strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. In 2002, Joseph Sobran announced his philosophical and political shift to libertarianism (paleolibertarian anarcho-capitalism) citing inspiration by theorists Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe.[8] He has referred to himself as a "theo-anarchist."[9]

      Sobran says Catholic teachings are consistent with his opposition to abortion and the Iraq War. He also argues that the 9/11 attacks were a result of the U.S. Government's policies regarding the Middle East. He claims those policies are formed by the "Jewish-Zionist powers that be in the United States."[10]"

      from; http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v07/v07p373_Weber.html

      "Several Sobran critics have been particularly upset over his friendly words for Instauration because of the feisty journal's staunch refusal to bow before the Holocaust totem. In the words of Newsweek writer Jonathan Alter, for example, "Instauration denies the reality of the Holocaust -- a classic [!?] anti-Semitic gambit." Alexander Cockburn, a regular contributor to the liberal weekly, The Nation, was riled at Instauration use of the term "Holohoax.""

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
  • Idoknow19
  • iamaman
  • kennymotown
    • +3
      kennymotown  

    • This has been bothering me for quite sometime. On the one hand the opposition as we all know comes unglued with the Democrats are week on defense bullshit and then that balancing act that follows keeps crap like this in place. I am waiting like so many of you for Obama to come out and kick the opposition to the curb. On the other hand the President has access to a daily briefing that none of us are privy too, therefor the new millions of enemy's the Bush administration created around the world are probably seeking with further intent
      to cripple our country. The President reluctantly has my support on many of these subjects, and I am confident his cool approach to issue's has shown me that change in the current environment is probably correct.

    • 1 year ago
  • ayipis
  • libertyforall
    • +3
      libertyforall  

    • Obama has continued many Bush era policies and even expanded on many others. I do find it strange how silent the left is on civil liberties now that a Democrat is in the White House.

      Although, I guess I shouldn't find it all that strange. Supporters of both parties care about civil liberties***

      ***As long as it is the opposite party in the White House

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
  • FoosMaster
  • shanklinmike
    • +1
      shanklinmike  

    • Only the libertarians will defend your right to own yourself and to be left alone to peaceful interactions. It's time for our society to mature, to respect each other without using the state on each other. It's time for us to stop using coercion on each other and instead using persuasion and education through voluntary means. Peace & Freedom to all

    • 1 year ago
  • unimatrix0
    • -1
      unimatrix0  
    • shanklinmike:

      Who are you kidding?

      Libertarians are impotent and irrelevant pimples on the ass of America.

      Libertarians defend nothing - they just blow a lot of smoke up each other's ass because it makes them feel good.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • +1
      ScottyT  
    • unimatrix0:

      So tell us where your statism ends and your self-deception begins? It's not that libertarians aren't out there trying to do something to stop this unconstitutional shitstorm that has afflicted our nation...it's that we're met on all fronts by holier-than-thous and narrow-minded simpletons, like yourself, who choose to view the world through such a narrow prism.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • jubal
  • iamaman
  • derk
  • littlwarrior
  • ibrake4rappers13
    • 0
      ibrake4rappers13  

    • I was reading this report and this is my favorite part

      "Of all of the national security policies introduced by the Obama administration, none raises human rights concerns as grave as those raised by the so-called “targeted killing” program. According to news reports, President Obama has authorized a program that contemplates the killing of suspected terrorists—including U.S. citizens —located far away from zones of actual armed conflict. If accurately described, this program violates international law and, at least insofar as it affects U.S. citizens, it is also unconstitutional.

      The entire world is not a war zone. Outside of armed conflict, lethal force may be used only as a last resort, and only to prevent imminent attacks that are likely to cause death or serious physical injury. According to news reports, the program the administration has authorized is based on “kill lists” to which names are added, sometimes for months at a time, after a secret internal process.

      Such a program of long-premeditated and bureaucratized killing is plainly not limited to targeting genuinely imminent threats. Any such program is far more sweeping than the law allows and raises grave constitutional and human rights concerns. As applied to U.S. citizens, it is a grave violation of the constitutional guarantee of due process."

      http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/EstablishingNewNormal.pdf

    • 1 year ago
  • alicynx
    • +4
      alicynx  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      Ahh, but here is the rub - our country has declared a 'War on Terror", which spans the globe. Therefore, the entire planet is in fact a warzone. Gotta love word choice. They would also argue to their dooms that killing these known terrorists are indeed preventing imminent attacks where they can surely find some intelligence to prove that they were plotting against us somehow. This paranoid, fear-mongering corporate culture we're led by is intelligently crazy, and why would anyone give up that kind of power?

    • 1 year ago
  • fun_size
    • +2
      fun_size  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      You realize he didnt start such things right? Obama is certainly not the first US President to assassinate foreign nationals. However i am worried about his inclusion of American citizens on the list. That is most definitely illegal and in violation of the Constitution.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • fun_size
  • FoosMaster
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      That program was started under Bush. Obama is just continuing it. Which is troublesome. Assassination for political reasons is a slippery slope. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    • 1 year ago
  • Omnomynous
    • -3
      Omnomynous  

    • Yeah if only this weren't coming from a source that finds nothing ethically wrong with suing school districts in impoverished areas just so 1 mistreated student can have a payday.

      Thank you ACLU for fucking over hundreds of students (many of whom have been mistreated) for the sake of just a few people who were "picked on".

      The ACLU being opportunistic shit eaters doesn't take away from the truth in their analysis of Obama though.

    • 1 year ago
  • noxidereus
    • +3
      noxidereus  
    • Omnomynous:

      Thank you ACLU for standing up for our civil rights!

      Following your logic, Omnomynous, only rich people or more specifically people who live in rich areas have the luxury of standing up for their rights.

    • 1 year ago
  • alicynx
  • fun_size
    • -3
      fun_size  
    • noxidereus:

      Omnomymous was pointing out that the ACLU has sued entire school districts because of the mistreatment of a single person. That means one person is now getting all the money that would have been allocated to hundreds of students. As a result many people suffer. How did that come off as him having a bias towards rich people?

    • 1 year ago
  • fun_size
    • +1
      fun_size  
    • alicynx:

      But its not the school that suffers, its the students that suffer. Its not like the money comes out of the board of eds wages... it comes from the school districts budget. Which then forces the school district to cut funding which negatively affects ALL the students!

    • 1 year ago
  • freecrack
    • +6
      freecrack  

    • not to bash you scotty, but it is gotten to be like a jouranlism vaccum in our country.no source outwieghs another anymore and all claim equal superiority, but are reporting the opposite of what the other guys are reporting.aclu good in one paper, aclu bad in another, both claiming accuracy.
      we are in serious trouble.not today,not tomorrow, but soon something will happen where accurate information will be critical to our survival and we will lack it.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • +1
      ScottyT  
    • freecrack:

      That's what I love about the ACLU. They're just about as hated as they are loved when it comes to issues regarding civil liberties in America. For the most part, I think they do this country a great service, and I will most likely be doing pro bono work for them for the remainder of my career.

      This report comes across as a pretty even analysis of the last 18 months of the Obama administration's progress towards dismantling the policies of the previous administration. In several areas, he's done a pretty good job; given the utter disaster that he inherited.

      I posted this article with the hopes that people read the report before the corporate media spins the shit out of it.

    • 1 year ago
  • freecrack
    • +1
      freecrack  
    • ScottyT:

      if it isnt already spun, as usualy anything reported about the aclu or southern poverty law center or naacp is based in spin.
      or maybe im just paranoid.

      i just see it as no one reports on anyone else for doing what they are supposed to do, but these groups and others like them are under a microscope for political reasons.just as we dont report on every instance of neo nazis putting out racist propaganda, cuz it is what they do.

    • 1 year ago
  • timetide
  • freecrack
    • +3
      freecrack  
    • timetide:

      for a while i was keeping tabs on that (i really had nothing going on) and it happens alot.a story with one or two comments and 27 views will sit between articles with dozens of comments and hundreds of views.
      i gave up giving a shit as no one else does

      for what it is worth, it doesnt appear as if thier is a pattern though.its never one source, or one meber betting this push, it seems random.i think current is trying to create a narrative using us as the editorial staff.we create the narratives and if it fits what they want to present, it gets a healthy jump to the top of the page where the casual observer can see what the site is about.

      i know they were on the market for a lil bit so maybe it is a sales technique gearing the site to prospective buyers?

    • 3 days ago
  • timetide
  • ScottyT
    • +2
      ScottyT  

    • Overall, the report states that the Obama administration has taken several steps to dismantle his predecessor's horrible human rights and civil liberties abuses. However, there's still many areas where this administration has failed to live up to their expectations of making a complete break from the policies of the previous administration.

      We should be demanding more from this administration. The plain truth is that nothing will change if the American people do not keep the pressure on Congress and the Executive to repeal the PATRIOT Act, FISA provisions, as well as any new Military Commissions provisions.

      One of the concluding paragraphs says it pretty well:

      "There can be no doubt that the Obama administration inherited a legal and moral morass, and that in important respects it has endeavored to restore the nation’s historic commitment to the rule of law. But if the Obama administration does not effect a fundamental break with the Bush administration’s policies on detention, accountability, and other issues, but instead creates a lasting legal architecture in support of those policies, then it will have ratified, rather than rejected, the dangerous notion that America is in a permanent state of emergency and that core liberties must be surrendered forever."

    • 1 year ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos