Wednesday, September 2, 2009

(Re-) Investigating Torture


Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is endorsing current AG Eric Holder’s decision to investigate whether US interrogators committed criminal offenses when they interrogated detainees.

Gonzales is actually bringing some clarity to the matter. During the Bush Administration the AG’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued a careful evaluation of interrogation techniques for the CIA, in which it ruled that waterboarding and several other “enhanced interrogation” methods were not torture. That ruling had the force of law: waterboarding was legal: even though John McCain and many others considered it torture, by law it was not.

Obama said months ago that his administration would not go after operatives who worked within the guidelines of the OLC. Holder is complying with Obama’s statement (although Obama has made clear that the decision is Holder’s alone to make). If interrogators operated within the law they won’t be prosecuted; if they went beyond the methods ruled legal by the OLC they will.

Criticizing Obama or Holder for second-guessing intelligence agents who operated in good faith is nonsense. Intelligence agents, like all other civil servants, military people, and Presidents, for that matter, have always been required to uphold the law. They took an oath to do so.

3 comments:

Judith Ellis said...

"Criticizing Obama or Holder for second-guessing intelligence agents who operated in good faith is nonsense. Intelligence agents, like all other civil servants, military people, and Presidents, for that matter, have always been required to uphold the law. They took an oath to do so."

YES! I was utterly alarmed by Dick Cheney's response to Chris Wallace Sunday. He essentially said that the end justifies the means. This is not so! But it has not even been proven that after torturing the detainees that anything was gained by it. I think that a full investigaton is necessary.

After Tom Ridge's omission about raising the "terror alert" for political reasons in his book, I'm afraid that many more things may be exposed. There seems to have been rogue operatives in the former administration and it seems very likely that Dick Cheney was in on it.

Maybe President Bush was wise in not pardoning the convicted felon Scooter Libby, Cheney's Chief of Staff and National Security Assistant.

Lisa Million Horowitz said...

Dick Cheney is from the Nixon school of 'what they don't know won't hurt them', when it comes to shining a light on covert operations of any kind. From the intention of protecting us from their necessary and messy jobs, comes the idea that Americans 'can't handle the truth'. Even if that is the case, ultimately the truth is revealed as we all pay the consequences. Our integrity is challenged and our confidence in our leadership is damaged. I trust that Mr. Holder will finally shine a light and let all of us 'handle the truth'.

Judith Ellis said...

Okay, even if the public doesn't know everything that's going on all the time, Congress most certainly should. In a representative democracy our interest is vested in our representatives. In many cases I have my doubts. Self-interest seems to be paramount for many in Congress.

Who knew about "Charlie Wilson's War?" But considering the mess that is still Afghanistan one has to wonder. I am thinking of what many believe was the politicization of the Iranian hostage crisis for presidential advantage. Did a top White House official come out then write about it?

Ethics and the rule of law are so very important. But we know for sure that the two are not inextricably bound. Laws in this country and a great many others have not necessarily been just or ethical. The voice of the people, usually the majority who sit on the sidelines and not necessarily those who scream the loudest, matters here.