CIA Got Legal Cover From Torture Charges

2002 Justice Department Memo Told Agency That "Good Faith" Protected Its Interrogators From Prosecution

(AP)  The Justice Department in 2002 told the CIA that its interrogators would be safe from prosecution for violations of anti-torture laws if they believed "in good faith" that harsh techniques used to break prisoners' will would not cause "prolonged mental harm."

That heavily censored memo, released Thursday, approved the CIA's harsh interrogation techniques method by method, but warned that if the circumstances changed, interrogators could be running afoul of anti-torture laws.

The Aug. 1, 2002, legal opinion signed by then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee was issued the same day he wrote a memo for then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales defining torture as only those "extreme acts" that cause pain similar in intensity to that caused by death or organ failure.

The Bybee legal opinion defining torture was withdrawn more than two years later. Justice spokesman Peter Carr said the conclusions of the opinion approving specific interrogation methods are still in force.

Waterboarding is a form of simulated drowning that critics call torture. CIA Director Michael Hayden banned waterboarding in 2006 but government officials have said it remains a possibility if approved by the attorney general, the CIA chief and the president.

Secret Bush administration memos authorizing harsh interrogation techniques have been made public starting in 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal revealed detainee mistreatment. Thursday's release adds to the growing record of the still secret program launched after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The new Bybee memo was obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union along with two other previously unreleased documents dealing with the CIA's interrogation program. The Bybee memo specifically approved proposed interrogation techniques that were devised for use against al Qaeda suspects who were resistant to traditional questioning methods.

The standards used to judge how physically rough an interrogation could be are blacked out. But interrogations that stress a detainee psychologically or emotionally were not allowed to cause "prolonged mental harm." That was defined as harm lasting months or even years after the interrogation.

The memo suggests psychiatrists or psychologists should be consulted prior to interrogations to assess the likely mental health effect on the prisoner.

"The healthier the individual, the less likely that the use of any one procedure or set of procedures will result in prolonged mental harm," the memo states.

The new documents indicate that senior Bush administration officials were aware of the controversial and potentially problematic use of certain interrogation methods, including waterboarding.

In a second memo, dated Jan. 28, 2003, then-CIA Director George Tenet authorized CIA officers to interrogate a terror suspect using an "enhanced technique" and ordered a record to be kept of it as the interrogation was happening. It was not clear whether such a record would be taken via notes, videotape or audiotape, but it was to include the "nature and duration of each such technique employed, the identities of those present" and other factors.

Tenet's memo also authorized the use of both "enhanced techniques" and "standard techniques," and said no other methods could be used "unless otherwise approved by headquarters."

Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's national security project, said the Tenet document suggests the CIA at least contemplated techniques that went beyond waterboarding.

He said the interrogation records, if released, could be used as evidence by defendants in military tribunals at Guantanamo to prove they were tortured or coerced.

A third document released Thursday is undated but likely was written in 2004, well after the last confirmed use of waterboarding against a CIA prisoner. It addresses a planned interrogation, saying that it should go forward only with the clear understanding of all policies pertaining to the treatment of prisoners.

That unsigned memo defends interrogations but warns those authorizing them to be fully aware of the then-emerging international and U.S. legal debate surrounding the issue. It appears to serve as groundwork to defend the legality of interrogations — including waterboarding — if necessary.

"Intelligence gained using the interrogation techniques has saved Americans lives and property," the unsigned memo states.

It pointed to the Aug. 2002 Justice Department opinion that concluded "interrogation techniques including the waterboard do not violate the torture statute."

For several years, the Bush administration relied on the findings in that 2002 opinion to maintain its interrogations did not amount to torture — and therefore had not violated any U.S. or international treaties on how detainees are treated.

However, the one-page undated memo highlights legislation by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., prohibiting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees. The amendment was approved by the Senate in June 2004 and was part of a 2005 military budget bill that became law in October 2004.

It also notes a 2004 Supreme Court decision — which found that terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay could challenge their detention in U.S. courts — that "raises possible concerns about judicial review of the program, and these issues."

The Bush administration maintains waterboarding was legal when it was used by CIA interrogators in 2002 and 2003 against top al Qaeda detainees Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. CIA Director Hayden said waterboarding was used, in part, because of widespread belief among U.S. intelligence officials that more catastrophic attacks were imminent.

[babooph]

Surely Dr. Mengela had legal ok to do his "camp" experiments.

[babooph]

The CIA has always been a place for the trust fund babies-children of the rich-are they well suited to torture? If Bush thinks this is so great,why are the twins not participating? Surely Prescots old Nazi connections in South America would hide them if need be later?

[dmgenet]

The Bush admin are scared little girls who have to have nads implanted to make them men. Power is their addiction (it used to be coke and alcohol for Bush)and the constitution was supposed to stop fascists like this.

[impeach__w]

I bet we could get bush and cheney and anyone else involved to admit their guilt in anything we wanted them to within 120 seconds using these techniques! Turn them over to Syria! Lets see what they have to say.

[DikHagen]

"CIA Got Legal Cover From Torture Charges?" Just because someone tells you or me or a government agency that they can torture people does NOT mean we can. How does anyone indemnify anyone else against an immoral and/or illegal act?

In BushWorld... If you have good intentions and are a Bush loving idiot - it''s ok to break the law.

[impeach__w]

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once wrote: "The government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or ill it teaches the whole people by example. To declare that the end justifies the means - to declare that the government may commit crimes - would bring terrible retribution."

[impeach__w]

There is no difference between a "terrorist" and a "Torturer". Both groups are as evil as they come and this administration does not have a legal definition of either.

Under this way of thinking one could kill any of these pols or torturers as long as they were only killing them to stop a felonious act Ie. severe bodily injury of another person.

Let them declare ececutive privilage or national security at at a patriots trial- IT WON''T happen- they have too much to hide.

[flreason]

"This a part of war and i support this treatment and think it is neccesary.Dont be nieve they are torturing our people also."
Posted by tootall1014

That is the kind of thinking that the Nazis used to justify their treatment of anyone who disagreed with them. The techniques are the same ones used by Stalin to get false confessions from innocent people. Our government''s use of torture destroyed our worldwide standing as an ethical nation guided by respect for the rule of law. When we emulate the actions of despots and terrorists, we become what we despise. A "victory" which sacrifices ethics and honor is a sham.

[grandesign]

At some point you have to ask yourself, is this the wrong approach to a very bad situation or is this just the way we are? Our Western civilization has used torture many times throughout its history, and the Enlightenment of our generation, our nation, may be no more. We may not be able to claim God''s grace, and must resort to the devil''s methods because it''s the means to and end. So looking back at The Great War, or even the Second World War where we chose as a nation not to be the savages that humans become during extreme circumstances, now we can instead say we are not that noble of a nation. We are just like our enemies and imitate them an eye for eye, evil for evil. And these values are instilled in our youth so they too act out in such ways. This may very well be the Legacy of the Bush Leadership.

[offyear]

"Waterboarding is a form of simulated drowning that critics call torture" Let''s count the things wrong with that sentence--1) it is drowning--not a form of simulated drowning; 2) there is broad consensus among sentinent humans that it is toruture. Only a very narrow goup believes otherwise. CBS, stop playing into this admin''s hands by accepting their words. Pathetic.

[johnpatrick9]

Didn''t we hang fascist Germans and Militaristic Japanese for the crimes of torture after World WarII??
We now have our own crop of home grown scum and what''s good for the goose is good for the gander. They have betrayed our ideals and opened a door we fought and died to close 63 years ago. Punish them and drive them from our Nation and from civilized society.

[spredbury]

I laugh when I read that Ms Rice said, what we did right after 9/11 was legal because Bush and his hit men got legal opinions that affirmed Bush''s torture policy as legal. Well sure, you will get the answers you want if the people giving the answers (writing the legal opinions) are as corrupt as those asking the questions. Bush, Rice, Chaney, Rove, Gonzales, and all the others in MY Government who supported torture should be tried in the Haag and sent to prision.

[impeach__w]

If the guy dies during interrogation, it is a murder. I''m sure they kept accurate records for these cases.

Look up some torture case on ACLU website. They seem to be keeping somewhat accurate records of these cases. The deaths I saw only covered through 2005

[impeach__w]

Anyone one stupid, fat, gay, or drunk enough to think rosie OD should be prez is a twisted individual. Especially if it IS Rosie OD.
All she can say is dumb lib and I saw a
head sawed off. They quit sawing heads off long ago as bad P.R. She should be in one of these prisons with the torturers she supports.

I am a Republican who never ever supported this evil regime. dumb lib is way off RosieOD!

[book54552134]

This utterly corrupt Administration has consistently used double-talk to manipulate Constitutional Law, International Law, & the Geneva Conventions in order to suit their own perverse & brutal agenda.

These are people who have absolutely no regard for the rule of law whether Constitutional or International unless of course, it benefits them or their cronies.

All involved in War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity, from those in this corrupt Administration who directed the torture & abuse of prisoners, down to the CIA or military personnel who actually initiated such abuse, must be made to be held accountable for their actions in accordance with US anti-torture laws & then, they should be made to answer for their crimes yet again before a War Crimes Tribunal at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague.

If these people are not held accountable for their crimes, then such laws (both domestic & International,) are meaningless, for they apply only to those nations which are unable to protect their war criminals from prosecution.

[nextgenman]

If there is a Hell, then I fear for all these "Good Christian Republicans"........

[babooph]

Ashcroft & Gonzales are good Christians-they know there is no "Tho shalt not torture" commandment-Bush assured all,when he ran that he had really good people to advise him.Sure glad he did not choose a "bad" advisor-we might all get boiled in oil.

[pkelly79]

Uh yeah, it''s cool. The Bobs said it was OK. Yes, we tortured but it''s cool because we told ourselves it was ok ... are you serious? How about a "wow, we really f#@cked up - can you believe we let it get his far"

[mh4cbs1]

Of course it is the policy of terrorists to torture their captives, just look and what Bush and Cheney have done.

Who is the bigger terrorist? Whose actions have resulted in more women and children shot or blown to bits?

Number 1 killer is Bush
Number 2 is Saddam
Number 3 is Osama

FACT