Memo says: Torture isn't torture if the CIA does it.

[Solly Mack]

Every year between the end of February and the beginning of March the State Department puts out its yearly report on Human Rights. I often post those reports when they come out.

Just some of the human rights violations the U.S. State Department addresses (and condemns) are:

• torture and abuse of prisoners and detainees
• arbitrary arrest and detention
• police impunity
• lengthy pretrial and incommunicado detention
• infringement of citizens' privacy rights
• beatings to the face and legs
• dousing with cold water

On page 2 of a memo to Jack Goldsmith from Scott Muller, we read about the CIA's "dousing" program.

• standing for long periods of time during the night
• subjected to loud screams and beatings of other detainees
• stripped naked in front of others
• burning genitalia
• forcing objects into the rectum
• hyperextending the spine

This past Monday, along with the long awaited 2004 CIA IG Report, there was this - "another document provided to the ACLU is a July 2007 memo from Steven Bradbury, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, to John Rizzo, Acting CIA General Counsel."


In the memo from Bradbury to Rizzo the State Department reports on human rights violations are addressed. A comparison is made between the human rights violations the U.S. State Department condemns in other countries and how those (same) violations differ when used in the CIA's "enhanced interrogation" program.






Excerpt: "As an initial matter, the State Department has informed us that these reports are not to be legal conclusions; but instead they are public diplomatic statements designed to encourage foreign governments to alter their policies in a manner that would serve United Stares interests."


In other words, the State Department report on human rights violations, such as torture (sleep & food deprivation) isn't meant to be seen as a statement against the CIA using the exact same techniques.





Excerpt: "Egypt employed torture to extract information, coerce opposition figures to cease their political activities, and to defer others from similar activities"

Which is not to be confused with the CIA's claim of using "enhanced interrogation techniques" torture to extract information

Excerpt: "In these essential respects, it (the CIA program of torture) fundamentally differs from conduct condemned in the State Department reports."

...and why do they say it is different? - Because the CIA tortures to protect America, doncha know!


Full document:

2007 OLC opinion on Interrogation Techniques


While I have your attention, please look again at the first photo-document. Notice the footnote at the bottom of page 38 and what it says.

Now go and read the assessment of how the Army Field Manual - the revised Army Field Manual, that is - was revised with the CIA's "enhanced interrogation techniques" very much benefiting (intentionally) from the revision.

You'll find the Army Field Manual Assessment just above the State Department reports assessment in the complete document linked to above. (Pages 36-38 of 79]















More from the ACLU

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Letters and Memos to CIA Regarding Detention and Interrogation Policies - Documents Responsive to 2008 Torture FOIA

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Letters and Memos to CIA Regarding Detention and Interrogation Policies - Documents Responsive to 2004 Torture FOIA

[Luminous Animal]

1. K & R. And thanks.

[Solly Mack]

2. Thank you, Luminous Animal

You're welcome

[G_j]

3. the old Nixon logic

if the President does it, it's legal, obviously this applies to the CIA also.


K&R

thanks, great post!

[Solly Mack]

4. I've been reading and re-reading and just getting angrier and angrier

and I was already angry to begin with...

[G_j]

7. no different?

the only real difference is the justification for torture.

Not according to the Geneva Conventions, or the Nuremberg Principles.

[Solly Mack]

8. Oh, they rather neatly explain the GC away. As well as the CAT

and other laws.

You know how we would conjecture about their actual motives and real intent when Bush/CIA/Cheney would parse their actions?

Well, we were right.

[G_j]

11. we certainly were,

from the previous line of thought, I should add though, there were just a very few instances where it actually was "illegal",
ask Lynndie England.

[Solly Mack]

12. That damn "bad apple" lie to hide the rest of the crimes behind

In that one memo, they talk about how various torture laws don't apply to them because they conduct their torture on foreign soil...and the laws state "under your jurisdiction"...so, if some other country owns the land and the building, the CIA can torture with impunity...

Just one of the things we said they were doing....like with GTMO..claiming it wasn't "US soil" - when it most definitely is under US "jurisdiction"

[G_j]

13. the God-Complex

Arrogance is what all crimes against humanity are based in.
Their God-like "Justification" is not merely a slippery slope, it's a precipice of no return.
A rose by any other name..
A war crime is a war crime.

[Solly Mack]

29. and a butt-load of exceptionalism

it's OK for America to use methods the US condemns as torture when other countries do it

and to further state that it is in America's best interests to condemn those countries for the use of torture...all the while the US is torturing people

[merh]

5. They knowingly tortured and said it was not torture because they were

doing it. They defined things to fit their purpose, to cover their asses.

POWs = enemy combatants

enhanced interrogation techniques = torture

choking to death = compression of a detainee’s carotid artery

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6382289

They perverted legitimate corrections procedures to torture, they trained others to do harm by convincing them that the ones they harmed were not human, were not worthy of humane treatment.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4033661

They are criminals, they can try to call it what they want but in the end they are criminals and evil.


:cry:

[Solly Mack]

6. So true, merh

wrapped torture in the flag and then demanded we salute it

Thanks for the additional links!!

[merh]

9. I hate them and I hate them for giving me cause to hate them.

They dehumanize the enemy and the enemy doesn't always take up arms against them. They are just those who don't fit in, those that are different looking or who don't think or worship as they think and worship.

The "us verses them" mentality is everywhere and it fosters fear and that fear fosters hate and that hate fosters violence. The evil, unending cycle.

They became and are the animals they accuse their enemies of being, they are what they profess to hate the most.

[Solly Mack]

10. True, again. Yet when they look in the mirror they see Captain America

When I look at them I see something so ugly and warped and twisted...posing as human.

[merh]

22. For those who wrap themselves in the flag and defend torture because

we do it to our own in SERE training:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6402117

[Solly Mack]

23. I saw that...and we can't forget the "reverse engineering" of SERE

The CIA's torture teachers

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/06/21/cia_sere/print.html

[merh]

26. That is what they did with legitimate corrections tactics

they bastardized them and used them to harm and intimidate.

[Solly Mack]

27. Thank you, merh

Just cause :hug:

[merh]

28. aww, thank you

for keeping this alive and helping me stay informed and for the hug and, aw hell, just cause.

:hug:

[spanone]

14. you'd think the world courts (if they truly exist) would disagree with this statement?

and ask questions about our torture program....you'd think, or i would

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. They have insofar as MI-5... since the UK is a party to the treaty establisihng it

we are not.

We didn't join under Junior and this is the reason why.

By the way, the Hague has made some noise about the UK

http://archive.wn.com/2009/08/09/1400/worldcourttv/

http://www.javno.com/en-world/lawmakers-want-inquiry-of-uk-complicity-in-torture_273279

Bow you think our courts are slow as glaciers? The Hague is even slower...

But unlike us they signed on.

I read, not remember where, that Tony Blair was actually worried of ending at the docket... I will look that up for you

Here you go

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070318&articleId=5111

[spanone]

20. t h a n k s

:hi:

[Solly Mack]

16. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has said the US should prosecute

specifically mentioning Bush and Rumsfeld

Course, saying ain't doing...or pressuring...or forcing...

[Solly Mack]

17. kick

[G_j]

18. Kick

[Solly Mack]

19. Thanks, G_j

[Soylent Brice]

21. K&R and bookmarked.

[Echo In Light]

24. _

[Solly Mack]

25. Everything looks better viewed through exceptionalism

Does my ass look fat in this flag?
Why, no! Your ass looks like amber waves of grain.

I joke.....sorta