The Justice Dept's Torture Debate

2005 E-Mails Reveal Lawyers' Arguments Over Ethics, Effectiveness Of Interrogation Rules, Pressure To Approve

(CBS/AP)  Senior Justice Department lawyers in 2005 sought to limit tough interrogation tactics against terror suspects, but were overruled.

James Comey, then the No. 2 official at the Justice Department, tried to convince Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that some of the tactics were wrong and would eventually damage the reputation of the department.

The New York Times reported Comey sent an e-mail at the time describing his efforts to curtail the use and combination of the tactics that critics call torture.

By April 2005, the opinions were in final form, and Mr. Comey, who had set his own resignation for August, concurred in the 46-page opinion affirming the legality of the 13 techniques. But he told Mr. Gonzales that he strongly objected to Mr. Bradbury’s second opinion, allowing multiple techniques to be used in a single interrogation session.

According to the Times, Gonzales said that he was "under great pressure" from Vice President Dick Cheney to complete memorandums authorizing interrogation techniques, and that President George W. Bush had asked about them.

Later, after expressing his concerns to Gonzales’ chief of staff, Theodore Ullyot, and requesting more time to analyze actual interrogations, Ullyot told him the White House would not wait.

"I told him the people who were applying pressure now would not be there when the (expletive) hit the fan," Comey wrote in an e-mail obtained by the Times. "It would be Alberto Gonzales in the bull's-eye. I told him it was my job to protect the department and the AG, and that I could not agree to this because it was wrong."

A person familiar with Comey's concerns, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press that Comey sought to put limits on the use of the interrogation tactics because he argued they were wrong on moral and ethical grounds, and they didn't work.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss a matter still under investigation.

The Justice Department has been conducting a long-running investigation into the conduct of the lawyers who wrote legal memos authorizing the CIA to use a variety of harsh measures, including sleep deprivation, slamming suspects into walls and waterboarding - a form of simulated drowning - as means to make those terror suspects talk.

The memos were the subject of internal debates within the Bush administration and were later made public by the Obama administration. Following the memos' release, some critics of the past administration have called for those who authorized the methods to be prosecuted as criminals.

The Times reported on its Web site Saturday that even among those Justice Department lawyers who objected to some of the methods, there were few claims that specific methods violated the law banning torture.

In releasing the memos, President Barack Obama said no CIA officials would be prosecuted for following the legal advice they were given.

[Illuminated1]

Good grief, goofball...

The laws of this country are refined and re-drawn every freaking day to suit the needs of national security and economic stability.

GET A LIFE AND SOME BRAINS!
Posted by IThoughtItWasFunnyAgain

Attacking the messanger is not new , ie "goofball"

Obviously you have no idea who I am...so let me enlighten you while not giving my identity away.
I have some brains as I work in an advanced science laboratory...researching physics.
My life is not your business, only my opinion is important here.

Only in due process is the law changed.......not after the crime has been committed
furthermore, Bushs' revelation of his eavsedropping was only because the media got wind of it, and began exposing his crimes....just the one of several he is responsible for...

He gave everyone 600 bucks...nice, he didn't tell them they were losing their homes ....

[Illuminated1]

The bottom line though is that a majority of americans understand that the presidents main job is to protect our country!
Posted by jedi0849


Wrong, the main job of the president is to follow his oath of office..

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

He had done neither of his duties as President as a matter of fact the
congress had to cover up his foul play violating it.
He got the execute part....thats' easy..
He forgot along with Dick Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz , Al Gonzales the rest of it concerning following the constitution and not redefining established and accepted standards such as torture. Eavesdropping on Americans phonecalls without warrent is unexcusable and I hold congress in contempt of the People of the United States for not going after that tyrant.

[Vet_Turner]

So you do think torture made us more safe, jedi0849? I don't get it. And if it did, should we have done it anyway? The answer of course is absolutely not. And if it did happen because someone knew that they had imminent information and some agents got over-bearing with the suspect, that's what presidential pardons are for. The Bush-Cheney cabal created a program around torture and you seem to support it. In 20 or 30 years this will be in textbooks and a huge blemish on the morality of the United States.

That Congress knew of this is disgusting I agree. But these were top secret briefings and very difficult for a member of Congress to talk about. And you may notice that Pelosi is in trouble too.

No, I am not naive. I've done my tours in Iraq and stopped abuse on multiple occasions. People get over rambunctious when their buddies fail to step-in and say enough, then that's when the law is their to prosecute their buttes.

And what information do you think some terrorist that has been on the lamb for months actually have? Please. Even as an officer in charge of missions, I knew nothing that was good outside of at most a week.

[jedi0849]

That's where I live....hope you wake up someday to the truth of our world.
Posted by Illuminated1 at 1:18 AM : Jun 8, 2009
+ report abuse

Sorry but the real world is not a world where are govt had anything to do with bringing down any of the towers. That is just crazy talk. I've seen the video's and films that claim this theory and I've also seen the films that disprove those films. Regardless of all that, it doesn't make any sense for our govt to want to do that. Plus while I won't argue that Bush made some mistakes, and maybe even crossed or approached a few lines of some people in this countries morality, It is pure crazy talk to think that anyone in the Bush Administration had anything to do with bringing building 11 or whatever down. Just total craziness.

So beleive what you want, but like I said, Bush did what he thought was best for our country in a time of war. The public disagreed so they voted in Obama. Thats how our country opperates. The next administration doesn't prosecute the previous one. Like I said in a previous post, every previous war president has done things that would be considered either unconstitutional or war crimes.

The bottom line though is that a majority of americans understand that the presidents main job is to protect our country!

[Illuminated1]

OMG, Your one of those who thinks Bush brought the towers down. I can't beleive I've wasted my time trying to talk with you about rational thought.

Have fun in La La Land.

Got go back to the real world Now
Posted by jedi0849

That's where I live....hope you wake up someday to the truth of our world.

[jedi0849]

The arguement that they followed the law is preposterous...they redefined the law to make it legal. That is undermining the system we live in. Treason is the best I can say about it when the law is abused for political needs...btw....Cheney had conspired to mislead congress in october 2002. His control of the CIA along with Rumsfield, Wolfowitz and others attempted to produce a false National Intellegence Estimate...that is treason. Bush and Cheney are not motivated by what is protecting the people, they only cared about the corporate families..As for feeling safe, I'm more afraid of my government runniing off with the corporation, than a desperate foreigner defending their homeland.
Posted by Illuminated1 at 1:03 AM : Jun 8, 2009

OMG, Your one of those who thinks Bush brought the towers down. I can't beleive I've wasted my time trying to talk with you about rational thought.

Have fun in La La Land.

Got go back to the real world Now

[jedi0849]

You know when you say, they cut off peoples heads, that really shows your ignorance. Those were Sunni in Fulluaja, Iraq who cut off the heads of some mercinaries. Yes, bad, very bad, but what do Sunni's have to do with 9-11 and them as a threat to the United States. It was the United States that invaded their country and made a mess of it. Not the other way around.
Posted by Vet_Turner at 12:22 AM : Jun 8, 2009

Point taken but your ignorance shows when you say that it didn't make us more safe OR that it effects how our people would be treated if they captured us. That is just phony outrage. Also, the atomospher was different after 9/11. Most people were behind those tatics, including like I said before Pelosi, Clinton. Holder ect.........

We had an election, Obama has outlawed torture (although he really hasn't). Its still ok under extreme situatins but this isn't reported by the State run Media.

I don't think going into IRAQ was a good idea but unlike the far left, I think that Bush got bad info from multilple documented sources that lead him to beleive that their was a reason to go. I don't think he just made the whole thing up for OIL or becasue Sadam tried to kill his old man.

I also know for a fact that there will be no prossecutions against Bush or Cheny, because Obama has said so.
So what should we do, disbar the lawyers who made the legal arguement. You can't do that, they were asked their oponion and gave it. Not a crime.
Like I said before, the whole Idea of Redition was used during the clinton administration. So maybe we should try Bill and holder.

Everyone and their sister in congress signed off on waterboarding and knew it was going on.

Its a dumb arguement anyways becasue nothing will ever happen to Bush or Cheny.

I say waterboard some more people if it gets us valuable info, once again I think your all wimps if you think thats tourture.

Last point. the idea that getting info from these guys is as easy as playing good cop bad cop with them is stupid. It obviously makes our country less safe to take these tatics off the table. Anytime you take any method off the tabel you become less safe. So you want to feel bad for mass murders and put people that kept you safe on trial while you read those evil people their rights thats your biz but you will never ever ever see the day when Bush or Cheny are prosecuted for keeping people safe. Hate to break it to you, but that is reality.

You should stop wathing the show "Countdown". Olberman doesn't even vote and him and the liberal extreme blogs are the only place where this is even discusses

[Illuminated1]

First of all to say that us waterboarding them makes them torture us is dumb to me. These guys were flying plaines into our buildings killing innoncent people long before we water boarded anyone. Also most of these people look for an excuse to be radical, they are mostly brain washed and come from poor places and are vulnerable to radical religion and action. So I don't beleive that us waterboarding others will effect how they treat our prisoners. Don't forget that they cut peoples heads off.

Also, I think that sleep deprivation was started and used under Clinton and Holder. Also I don't beleive water boarding is a big deal. it doesn't leave and lasting damage to the body, just makes you gag on water. We have all had that feeling before, when water goes up your nose. Don't get me wrong, its a scary feeling but its not like were cutting these peoples toes off or pulling their teeth out. Seems to me that if our seals go through it for training, I don't mind if we poor some water on some people.

Also, as far as I know we only waterboarded the three guys

Third If you don't pay attention to history youll never learn from it.

Fourth Your right, probably not 80 precent but at least 60 percent would say its ok to waterboard if it could prevent a attack. FOR SURE!

Fifth- they didn't break the law, they follwed the law according to those memo's from the lawyers that everyone is talking about. They asked for legal advice on what they could do that was NOT torture, then they did it. They didn't cross the line and they had lots of people in their monitoring these tatics.

6th- Right after 9/11 there would of been 80 percent of people who would say do whatever to prevent another attack. Bush and Cheny were in charge, they did things to protect us and now that it worked and everyone feels safe they want to go back and critisize something that most were for. Includding, Hillary, Pelosi, Edwards, Kerry, and many many others on the Dem side.

USA
Posted by jedi0849


Taking your points one at a time...
Nobody in a civil land would condon the taliban in afghanistan, pakistan, and al quada beheading people.
You mention the world trade center attack and still think the "terrorist"...they, brought down the buildings....I am not convinced they did it alone, as I believe they had inside help...building 7 was hundreds of feet away and it came down too...bbc even reported thr building down with live coverage 20 minutes before it actually happened. The Pentagon did not have damage consistant with an airliner crash and the jet disintegrated, yet the people inside didn't...explain that..
You seem to be under the impression our involvement in war is over....that is a grossly bad estimate.. The enemy in any war we get into now have our example of breaking the Geneva Conventions, and redefining the meaning of torture to enhanced interrogation is ludicrous.

All the useful information from captured enemy combatants that we got was obtained using regular interrogation, it was only after they gave information they were subjected to "enhanced interrogation" (illegal torture defined since the Spanish American war).
And by the way we have killed while torturing....not just the 3. It has been hushed up with the renditioning of people everywhere else but here.

The arguement that they followed the law is preposterous...they redefined the law to make it legal. That is undermining the system we live in. Treason is the best I can say about it when the law is abused for political needs...btw....Cheney had conspired to mislead congress in october 2002. His control of the CIA along with Rumsfield, Wolfowitz and others attempted to produce a false National Intellegence Estimate...that is treason. Bush and Cheney are not motivated by what is protecting the people, they only cared about the corporate families..As for feeling safe, I'm more afraid of my government runniing off with the corporation, than a desperate foreigner defending their homeland.

[Vet_Turner]

jedi0849,
I know far too many others just like you that believe in torture and water-boarding. You are also in the same group that believed Bush 100% for his Iraq War. Are you not embarrassed for being duped into the war. God, I hope you don't ever sit on a jury, as you can't see through the most basic of lies.

I can just hope that you will eventually see through it and become a crusader for what is right rather then what is justified by bogus aurguments.

You know when you say, they cut off peoples heads, that really shows your ignorance. Those were Sunni in Fulluaja, Iraq who cut off the heads of some mercinaries. Yes, bad, very bad, but what do Sunni's have to do with 9-11 and them as a threat to the United States. It was the United States that invaded their country and made a mess of it. Not the other way around.

[Vet_Turner]

It does not matter if you believe it is a moral argument of not. Torture can not be justified. And by supporting it only because you liked Bush and Cheney or you believe them that it kept you more safe, is an illigitimate aurgument. It is wrong and when our government totures, we torture. The fact that our leaders have justified it (like they did the war) makes it even more despicable.

I remember when this first came up and me and my colleuge, an Army Colonel, were talking about it. He said, it is not possible. We do not torture. For all the other citizens and soldiers out their that thought our country was better than that, I am really sorry that it happened. Now we have to hold the people responsible for their crimes against the torture of the inmates and the crimes of letting us all down and leading far too many others down a immoral road.