CHANGE MY LOCATION
Jay McDonough
Progressive Politics Examiner
Examiner Feeds
These websites were picked by the Progressive Politics Examiner as useful resources.National Examiners
Employment News Examiner
Most Recent Article
U.S. companies cut 533,000 jobs in November
Auto Examiner
Most Recent Article
Holiday automotive gift guide for Mr. or Mrs. Auto Fix-It
Early Childhood Parenting Examiner
Most Recent Article
Christmas Countdown Digital Advent Calendar: 20- Personalized stockings
Paranormal Examiner
Most Recent Article
Looking for workshop presenters, gain international exposure as an expert in your field
Examiner is growing in Los Angeles
We are seeking writers... Ready to join us? Learn More »
Justice to CIA Torture memos released
1 comment
From an August 2002 memo:
To violate the statute [against torture], an individual must have the specific intent to inflict severe pain or suffering. Because specific intent is an element of the offense, the absence of specific intent negates the charge of torture. As we have previously opined, to have the required specific intent, an individual must expressly intend to cause such severe pain and suffering. (Link)
The Associated Press reports on the August 2002 memo:
(The) DoJ memo 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 the will of prisoners, including waterboarding, would not cause 'prolonged mental harm.'
The Aug. 1, 2002 memo 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. That memo was later rescinded by the Justice Department.
Wow, that's some lousy legal advice. If you didn't really mean to torture a detainee you can't be criminally prosecuted for breaking anti-torture statutes. You will always have deniability. (I suppose, using the same logic, murderers can argue they shouldn't be charged with murder because they really didn't mean to kill their victim).
Reading excerpts from the memos, I was reminded of the recent interview with the North Vietnamese prison guard that held John McCain at the Hanoi Hilton prisoner of war camp:
"If I were an American voter, I would vote for Mr. John McCain," Tran Trong Duyet said Friday, sitting in his living room in the northern city of Haiphong, surrounded by black-and-white photos of a much younger version of himself and former Vietnam War prisoners.
At the same time, he denies prisoners of war were tortured. Despite detailed POW accounts and physical wounds, Duyet claims the presumed Republican presidential nominee made up beatings and solitary confinement in an attempt to win votes. (Link)
That's really the way it works, isn't it? Torturers will never admit they've tortured. It's all about developing that deniability.
Subscribe
Feed
Comments
More from Progressive Politics Examiner
Obama's birth certificate; you can't keep a good conspiracy theorist down
The president's most solemn oath
Topics: Torture , Bush , Mukasey
Auto industry predictions
The case for health care investment
A picture for the day
UAW offers concessions to automakers
Subpoenas issued in Justice probe
Retired officers want torture revoked
Proposition 8 - The Musical
Topics: Proposition 8 , Funny or Die
