"...exactly what the Bush administration intended."

[laststeamtrain]

New Bush Torture Bombshell Memos: 10 Horrifying Discoveries
By Liliana Segura, AlterNet
Posted on April 17, 2009, Printed on April 17, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/137093/

The Obama administration has finally released four long-awaited legal memos used by the Bush administration to design its torture program -- and although their existence, like U.S. torture itself, has been an open secret for years, the memos are nonetheless shocking.

Written in a dispassionate legal tone, the documents contain the professional opinion of Office of Legal Council attorneys Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury as they assessed the CIA's "harsh interrogation techniques" between 2002 and 2005. Each method is described in sadistic detail, and each would surely be heinous if experienced on its own. But, as pointed out in the famous "Bybee" memo, dated August 1, 2002 -- the "interrogation team planned to use these techniques "in some sort of escalating fashion, culminating with the waterboard, though not necessarily ending with this technique."

The torture memos are available on the ACLU website. But if you can't bring yourself to read them, below are ten disturbing excerpts that provide a hideous glimpse of what was done in the name of Americans in the so-called "war on terror." As you read them, keep in mind that the Obama administration has already announced that it will not seek charges against the people who carried out the actions they describe. "In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution," Obama said in a statement.

"This is a time for reflection, not retribution. ... We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement, too. "It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department," he said.

Which was exactly what the Bush administration intended.

<more>

http://www.alternet.org/rights/137093/new_bush_torture_bombshell_memos%3A_10_horrifying_discoveries/

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

[Renew Deal]

2. I don't think we should be prosecting CIA agents and soldiers either

Unless they fit the ACLU criteria I read earlier (they went beyond what was allowed, the knowingly did something illegal, etc.). Now, Baybee, Bradbury, Rummy, Gonzales, and others should head straight for a war crimes tribunal.

[atreides1]

5. That's the problem

We only have the word of those evil fucks who did the hands on torture, that they didn't go beyond what was allowed. You do remember that the CIA destroyed transcripts of the interrogations, don't you?

Now, do you really think that any of those interrogators are going to admit that they went beyond what was allowed?

[Renew Deal]

7. I get your point.

I'm not convinced that the people that did this stuff are "evil." You served, so you know how things work better than I do. I am disinclined to prosecute service people unless it's an Abu Graihb type situation. I'm more inclined to get the people that gave the order.

[zeemike]

3. If there were ever a recipe for a right wing takeover it would

be this.
Attempt to prosecute everyone that was involved in these crimes...
That would be thousands of military people including generals.
It would mean many in the CIA and intelligence agencies.
And it would mean probably half of the congress.
And they all would revolt and we probably have a military dictatorship in no time.
This is the reality of the situation that too many just don't want to accept or understand.

[laststeamtrain]

4. What an astounding statement.

You're saying don't follow the law 'cause if you do the lawbreakers won't like it & they will revolt.

That's like the scenario of a bad movie.

I don't want to live in that world. I don't live in that world.

[zeemike]

9. Well I am sure glad you are not president.

Because that is exactly what would happen and you should know that.
Sure you would go out with a flash of morality but you would go out. And leave this country in shambles with a right wing government that we would never get back by peaceful democratic means.
Reality is a bitch sometimes.

[laststeamtrain]

11. WOLVERINES!!! n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. We'd be at Rwanda levels within ten years

Every new regime prosecutes the last. Every election will be a shooting war. The rub of this situation is that there was actual law-breaking, so we're split between the purists, who say "Rule of Law though the Heaven's Fall!" and the compromisers, who say the cost for civil society will be to high if every regime prosecutes the last. These are both reasonable positions, by the way.

[atreides1]

6. Then that would prove one thing

That in order to cover their asses, those that you describe are nothing more then potential traitors. Traitors who would overthrow a government not because of good reasons but because they are evil scum in the same way that Bush and Cheney and the rest of that cabal are evil scum!

Support and defend the Constitution, nothing but words that have no meaning for those that you describe.

[zeemike]

10. Well that is the reality like it or not.

And it took many years to get to this point but here we are.
And pretending that one man can undo it all by strictly following the constitution and law, when that constitution and law have ben compromised for years is not facing reality.

[gratuitous]

8. Oh,it would be "unfair" to prosecute torturers

Two words: Bull. Shit.

[Echo In Light]

12. What Neocons have intended all along is chaos/conflict, and so set about ensuring it

For what should be obvious reasons

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Hideyoki Yamashita was HUNG for waterboarding US soldiers

during WW II

We shot US troops for waterboarding philillipinos during the Spanish-American war.

We have lost our moral compass

[zeemike]

15. Yes and in those days it was against US policy to torture.

That changed with the Bush administration.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. 1998 torture laws passed by the US congress

no pass from me

Perhaps you will give them a pass for "practical reasons" but they will not get a pass from me

As I said, as a nation we lost our moral compass... and the nation is dead...

[zeemike]

19. I agree we have lost our moral compass.

And that being said what do we do about it.
Run off to Canada or some other country?
Commit suicide?
Just give up and let the RW have it? Because if we don't try to solve this through a political means then the only option we will have is revolution and civil war...and frankly we could be on the loosing end, especially sense the RW is well armed and would have many in the military behind them for fear of retribution.
Having high moral principles is one thing and change is another.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Well I am not hopeful the country will survive

intact.

And I do what I can do... send letters to congress and spit in the wind

[L. Coyote]

17. This says nothing of those who tortured first, then wrote the memos for cover!!

The problem here, in legal terms, is the Bush administration is still viewed as legitimate.
If they were viewed as a junta, actors who stole the Office of President by illegal means,
the legal dynamic changes. Maybe we should look back for evidence/solutions to this quandry.

Why assume Bush as President was acting in the interests of the United States? Look what happened to the United States!

[Solly Mack]

18. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!