Justice to CIA Torture memos released

July 24, 7:29 PMProgressive Politics ExaminerJay McDonough

Previous Next

1 comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Progressive Politics Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

The ACLU has released a series of memos between the Justice Department and the CIA effectively claiming that “as long as CIA agents could convince themselves they were not deliberately inflicting severe pain or suffering on detainees, they were free to do virtually anything in their questioning of suspected terrorists, including waterboarding.”

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 That memo was later rescinded by the Justice Department.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.