Just Disgusting

I hate to ruin a perfectly nice Friday, but I was just watching Frances Townsend - former Bush administration Homeland Security senior advisor - defending the Bush administration's torture memos on CNN. "By disclosing these memos, we are handcuffing future administrations," she says.

No, we need to handcuff past administration's officials...

Our "liberal" media, getting former Bush administration officials' positions on the memos they authorized. CNN also saw the need to title this section thus: Bush "torture" memos... as if this were just an allegation.  I'm sure we're going to see this pattern repeated over the weekend.

Check out hilzoy's commentaries on the memos at Obsidian Wings. I was particulary struck by this one. Obama and Holder are wrong to suggest that the US government ought to not prosecute CIA/DOD interrogators who participated in this process, not to mention the DOJ lawyers who okayed it.

Comments

[Mutt]

So do we really want to politicize the cadre of civil service professionals who carried out these orders?

It's a question of priorities. You say we need to handcuff past administration officials, and the civil servants?

For the record, the administration didn't 'suggest' the US government 'ought not' prosecute DOD/CIA interrogators. It said, if they followed the letter of the instructions here, they will NOT prosecute them.

[J.]

"So do we really want to politicize the cadre of civil service professionals who carried out these orders?"

Too late. Bush administration already did that. "I was just following orders" ought not to be an excuse. After My Lai, every soldier who's been in the Army has been indoctrinated that they do not have an obligation to follow an obviously illegal order. And if the operators who followed that memo couldn't figure it out, then maybe the current and future CIA/DOD/DOJ employees all need mandatory training on that.

[NVH]

We / They've learned the lesson. Don't get caught. IF Obama wants to hamstring his options for prosecuting terrorists, which god help us if we make this a police action, then so be it. Dealing with these people and the destruction they wrought, however minimal in your opinion J., should be the example we show to the other terrorists thinking about it, and convince them to work at 7-11 instead or stay away from us at least. While I don't necessarily advocate being proactive about torture, once they throw the first punch, gloves are off, and we aren't doing anything anyone else hasn't done before, and with quite a measure of restraint compared to them before us. It's not a black or white issue, except when you talk about the politics of it, and really, who cares about that aspect anyway other than the politicians.

[Ray]

If the US (and UK) don't appear to fully condemn these practices by failing to enforce the criminal laws on those concerned, or fail to use some significant punitive action on those involved in torture, then the US and UK cannot, without an enemies' evidential retort, point the finger in future on those who kidnap or take prisoner US or UK citizens or military personnel, and torture them.
The US is the world's foremost democratic power; its examples of excercise of that power may be emulated, positively or negatively. The policy of don't do as I do, but do what I say won't work.
The question, it seems here, is, why was interrogation not carried out without the use of torture. Were the interrogators unable to elicit information from prisoners, due to some unique ability on the part of the interrogated, to evade or refuse answering.
The US has obviously carried out important successful interrogations without torture in all the wars in which she has been involved. Are these present day ones any different, in interrogative terms, from those in the past, and if so in what respects.
Remember, the most intransigent, and skilled, Japanese captured military were successfuly questioned.
Today, does the fault lie with the interrogator. International Law must be followed by the signatories. Aside from that, Mr Obama will have asked, we are sure, whether the process of interrogation would fail if torture stopped. Remember, prisoners will continue to be questioned, and vital information sought. Mr Obama clearly believes- presumably on the basis of expert and experienced opinion, that the work of interrogation can proceed without causing consistent and serious flaws in policy.
If it doesn't work, we should be told why.
R.

[James O'Brien]

J, you obviously feel very strongly about this; as I'm sure many Americans do. However, these civil servants weren't just "following orders." At each turn, they asked for verification that these techniques could be applied and were given legal guidance. Most of us are aware that rapport is the key to getting information out of interrogations, however there are some circumstances that require different approaches. The techniques discussed in these memos were used in a tiny fraction of the interrogations of terrorist suspects since 9/11. While we currently have the distinct privilege of conducting this debate in a free society far from the fears that gripped us following the worst terrorist attack on US soil, these techniques are sure to be employed again in limited circumstances and with respect for the law when we, once again, call on the men and women of America's intelligence services to preempt, disrupt, and defeat terrorist aggression.

Additionally, I find it appalling and disrespectful that some would declare these techniques to be torture; the same word used to describe a far worse fate that countless dictators have inflicted on innocents. While it may seem like a euphemism, enhanced interrogation is exactly what this amounted to. For depictions of actual torture, please see the actions of the Spanish Inquisition, Hitler, and the entire history of North Korea following Kim il-Sung's rise to power. And yes, I am aware of the definition proffered in the UN Convention Against Torture; like most documents written by committee, its failure lies in substituting logic with agreeable platitudes.

[Ray]

James,
Waterboarding is torture. No rapport there; and it is a principle as you indicate. Empathy is better, but arises on rare occasions and can be more destructive to the interrogator than the- shall we say: client.
The best interrogators are those that don't like doing it; the worst are those that are unaware that they like the procedure more than finding the information. It's a job- not the Holy Grail.
Improvements to prevent torture should always be sought, and committees charged with the job of setting standards cannot put in writing every anticipated nuance and mor that interrogators will encounter.
In the end, if torture becomes an issue,we always come back to principles- in this case, as you are talking about Americans, we come to the Constitution; universally admired by some, hated by others, but sworn to by every American to defend, not in part, but as a whole. It is difficult for anyone who has not been an interrogator to know the pressures he or she can be under- sometimes from his own people to get "results". Failure is what some interrogatrs fear more than anything else- they must have an approved product or they might not be viewed as incompetent.
Those interrogators, and those who encourage that the ends justify any means should be weeded out.
Interrogators fall into more than one school. It is possible for those charged with that duty (yes, duty, not vocation) might disagree on methods, but not on democratic,lawful, procedures. It isn't merely idealistic. the interrogator is helped by having the kind of protection your Constitution offers.
In the atmosphere at the place of interrogation it is not possible to think about these procedural principles in their every aspect- there are other things on peoples minds- the task at hand. However, the nuts and bolts of the interrogation methods should- must- have inbuilt even unconscious ways of behaviour that prevent matters getting out of hand.
R.

[Sven Ortmann]

The torturers exceeded the legal limitations anyway by applying more water than allowed and breaching other conditions as well.
They're torturers and deserve life-long sentences just like their masters.

Jason, still seeking assholes of the year?
The world is a bad place - you could find one mega asshole every day.