Current Article

Bush’s Tortured Logic

By Larry Johnson on April 16, 2009 at 6:42 PM in Current Affairs

Although the Bush team appears to have dodged the bullet of facing a foreign jury for their role in promoting or approving torture, the truth is starting to seep out. It ain’t pretty. Antiseptic maybe, but not pretty.

A 18-page memo, dated August 1, 2002, from Jay Bybee, Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA. [PDF]
A 46-page memo, dated May 10, 2005, from Steven Bradbury, Acting Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA. [PDF]
A 20-page memo, dated May 10, 2005, from Steven Bradbury, Acting Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA. [PDF]
A 40-page memo, dated May 30, 2005, from Steven Bradbury, Acting Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA. [PDF]

These are important. Why? Because they provide the American people a glimpse into the banality of evil.

I have a mea culpa as well. When the question first arose about what techniques were appropriate for using to interrogate terrorist suspects I drew on my own experience as a “subject” during a CIA hostage interrogation training course. We were subjected to a variety of techniques, including stress positions, sleep deprivation and confinement to small, cramped boxes. I experienced four of the seven techniques employed against Abu Zubaydah. I took the position that if it was done to me in an exercise then it was probably okay to do it to the terrorists.

I was wrong. I was in an exercise that was going to end and I knew the people running it could not hurt me or they would face punishment. Zubaydah did not have that option. Moreover I was not familiar with the law. When I took time to read the UN Convention Against Torture I received an eye-opening education. The law is clear. What Bush authorized was torture and was against the law.

Finding weak legal arguments to justify immoral activity is the work of fools and knaves.

I applaud the ACLU for securing these documents. It is a good first step.

Unfortunately, Barack “Mr. Constitutional Scholar” Obama left the door for future abuses? Why? No one who worked for the CIA will be punished for carrying out these actions.

Ironically the U.S. Department of Justice this week was allowing a former Nazi death camp guard to be deported back to Poland to face possible charges for abuses he committed while carrying out the orders of superiors. Hell, while we are giving everyone a pass for illegal, immoral activity carried out for what the leaders considered to be a good purpose, let’s let Demanjuk go. At least we would be consistent.

Rule of law my ass.

Diana L. C.

Larry,

I have agreed with you all along. Torture is wrong. What is against the law is against the law. I have always felt that allowing this activity was the worst crime the Bush administration committed. O’s decision not to pursue this issue in court disturbs me greatly.

The thing I wanted most from this presidential election was a redirection of our country back to the moral high ground.

HARP

You will never have moral high ground, with this phony christian.

Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply With White House Request:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46667

I’mFedUp

Harp, I saw that. Isn’t that disgusting? Christian? ROFLMAO.

Docelder

Of all the goofy, quirky things he has done… for some reason this troubles me as well. I take it as a disrespect for Jesus. I don’t know who he thinks he is, but he is of this Earth and is not above the heavens or anything therein.

TeakwoodKite

And Ashcroft putting a cloth over the naked sculpture makes BO doing this, what exactly?

Obama did not mention the name of Jesus during his address. However, he did mention Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

.

The One.

Peggy Sue

I find it troubling that the WH made the request. But frankly, I find it even more troubling that Georgetown agreed.

I’mFedUp

My nephew goes to Georgetown…he and his friends are disgusted. Yet another thing we have to be ashamed of as far as the Commander in Thief.

HARP

I guess he just stand the competition.

cynic

Iesus Hominum Salvator “Jesus savior of humankind,” In Hoc Signo “in this sign (you shall conquer),” In Hac Salus “in this (cross) is salvation.”

Separation of church and state, remember?

In my opinion, it was appropriate to obscure the symbol on the occasion of a presidential speech that would be viewed by a general audience.

HARP

Well you won`t mind when he speaks at Harvard that they cover up “Veritas” which means truth.

Donna Brazile

Sic nic:

Or better yet…………

Don’t speak at a school with a religious affiliation……………

Or, find a place on the campus that’s symbol free………….

Stop the slobberfest!
cynic

It’s a matter of visual context. At Georgetown, the camera angle toward the podium would have framed things in a way that would have appeared deliberate and meaningful.

It’s not quite the same situation as being surrounded by the obviously Christian religious setting that is Notre Dame.

HARP

Who the Hell mentioned Notre Dame.

Docelder

The President has issues… to put is politely.

I’mFedUp

cyanide always finds some way to rationalize the Stoner in Chief’s hatred of America and Americans.

Donna Brazile

You tell it!

Carlaforhillary

Yeah, but Obama had no problem sending thousands of flyers to South Carolina with him pictured with Christ behind him. He is a hypocrite.

deminva

The principle of reversibility is often helpful in situations like these. What if President Obama had spoken in a hall with Muslim symbols and hadn’t covered them? Would you applaud that decision? Or would you be disgusted that he had connected the Office of the President of the United States with the Muslim faith? Might you perhaps be angry that he had chosen a Muslim place of worship to deliver his remarks?

I’m Christian. I’m married to an Episcopal priest. I applaud his decision.

I also think it worth noting that President Obama explicitly referenced the Sermon on the Mount and its metaphor of building a house on a solid foundation. Is President Obama being faux-Christian when he references the teachings of Jesus? Or if he doesn’t reference the Bible, is that in turn proof that he isn’t really Christian?

President Obama attended Easter Services at St. John’s-Lafayette Square. Was that a faux-Christian action?

HARP

20 Years of listening to Wright is ALL the proof I need, but you can keep your rose colored glasses on if that’s what floats your boat.

I’mFedUp

Do the Bots read from a script?

HARP

Naw…….They are hypnotized by his Colgate smile.

I’mFedUp

They’re stoned…I think they put something in the Kool Aide.

shadow

Yes. If he was a real christian he would never cover up christian symbols.
Carlaforhillary

What is the symbol of the muslim faith? And no, I wouldn’t have cared if he spoke at a mosque with the symbols showing. That would make sense, if the symbols were showing b/c they are there and we already know he would be there.

Yes, if those who are standing up for Obama believe it was right what he did b/c of the separation of church and state, then Obama shouldn’t have spoken there at all.

Paul

In response to evidence that the US has tortured, you are worried about IHS being covered behind a podium. That is unbelievable!

texaslatina

all these evil men who do evil things on earth and get away with it while alive, will one day have to pay for what they have done. i know there is a special place in hell for them waiting for them right along with the murderers of my beloved President John Kennedy. and there they will suffer for all eternity. that’s my consolation because it is obvious there is no justice here on earth.
Dawnelle

Larry, I was just picking my JAW up OFF the floor when I heard the news (down the hall) that BAMBI was NOT going to prosecute anyone??? HUH????

(the heartburn I feel is REAL)

he is SUCH a HUGE HUGE LYING P.O.S.
I can’t believe this is NOT some serious BAD MOVIE. Filled with BAD ACTORS and INEPT movie directors and producers! A FLOP!

EMPTY HAT II – hoodwinked at the O.K. Corral
KmX

LOl SOme of the tactics are actually very funny. I was reading where they told one prisoner that they will subject him to a poisonous spider and instead they use a spider that was harmless. The prisoner was freaked out. It was all psychological. Another case they allowed female offciers to interrogate them and the muslim prisoners hated that. lol

If that is toture, Saudi Arabia must be paradise.

Even in the case of waterboarding, they were only allowed to water board until a certain time. I am sure the real torture will come when they go back and face their own country prisons.

deminva

LOL! Torture funny!
Ferd Berfle

I was reading where they told one prisoner that they will subject him to a poisonous spider and instead they use a spider that was harmless.

Then you try it. Or maybe you like snakes better. Or maybe scorpions (“fake”, of course).

As a person who gets the willies even having a spider in the same room with me (I know it may seems a bit silly but really isn’t), I’d go hunt down any POS who tried putting one near me. It would be the last time they did it, that is certain.
Not so proud as I once was…

2 prisoners are known to have died under US interrogation at Bagram.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/america-admits-suspects-died-in-interrogations-599744.html

At least 3 others died under interrogation in Iraq, one being Manadel al-Jamadi who died under interrogation at Abu Ghraib.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6988054/

We know about a few people we “interrogated” to death. Who knows what we don’t know about?
Ani

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/07/03/did-they-tell-him-it-was-scotch/

Check this out from Chris Hitchens — who tried waterboarding, since he didn’t used to think it was torture either — he made it through about 1 second of this before he hit the kill switch on the test.

This may change your mind.

Benjamin Cardozo

Steve Harrigan, another journalist, also subjected himself to waterboarding. His conclusion was scary – yes, torture – no. How can a procedure that one would voluntarily subject themselves to, knowing that there will be no mental or physical consequences arising therefrom, be considered severe within the definition of Geneva Convention.

cynic

You’re beginning to convince me that maybe prosecution really ought to proceed. Because people obviously aren’t getting what happened.
Ani

Are you kidding? Go try it yourself and then talk to me.

Peggy Sue

Larry, I admire the fact that you are willing to admit that at one point you took a certain position, but then reconsidered and changed your viewpoint.

That’s honorable and takes a degree of humility.

I wish there were more out there willing to say: You know what? I was wrong.

What a world we would have!

Thanks for the article.
Benjamin Cardozo

THe UN Convention prohibits severe mental or physical pain and suffering. The definition of severe that some are trying to apply here would result in involuntary subjection to a common amusement park ride as being torture.

Peggy Sue

So, Benjamin: waterboarding doesn’t meet [at the very least] severe mental suffering?

Sorry, I wouldn’t want either of my sons to experience that. I don’t care how monstrous the enemy is or how monstrous their torture techniques might be. If we become the enemy, assume their attitude, then we’ve lost, everything we are, everything we believe in.

We’re better than that. And if we’re not then we have no business pointing fingers or pretending that [the enemy] are the primitive bastards we say they are.

We either live by the law. Or we don’t. There is no middle ground.

Ferd Berfle

Amen, Peggy Sue. As McCain said, this is about us.

Peggy Sue

And that’s why I respected many of McCain’s positions, Ferd. He was right and he’d been there.

Benjamin Cardozo

Waterboarding has been used in the training of military and CIA personnel. Several investigative journalists have voluntarily submitted themselves to waterboarding. These individuals have all walked away without severe mental suffering, in fact without any mental or physical harm at all, short or long term,

Waterboarding is a simulation, and simulations when properly conducted by definition cannot result in mental or physical suffering. I have worked with professional flight simulators, you feel as if you are in a real airplane cockpit, full instrumentation, except the windows are display panels, and sounds are synchronized to the displays. You have all the sensations of flight and g-loading and can be made to feel as if the aircraft is stalling and going into an unrecoverable tailspin. You can experience fright upon imminent crash.

Under your concept of severe mental suffering, that flight simulator experience would be torture. In reality, you have not moved more than six inches in any one direction and the forces applied to the body are no greater than what one would experience while driving over a potholed road.

QUEENIE

reply to : Benjamin Cardozo

how can you possibly equate a simulated incident with a real one? Are you truely that delusional??????????

I too have worked in Aircraft simulators..for 33 years I was a flight crew for a major airline..in fact one of the arilines involved on 9/11..For 33 years I worked in simulators for yearly emergency training..I also taught at my airlines flight school for new hires in simulators..

There is a big f’ing difference between a simulated emergency and a real one..

I too have experienced the real deal in 33 years ..4 times..big f’ing difference!!!!!!!!!

And the nerve of you to equate them, and to even attempt to use that as an analogy knows no ingorant bounds!!

The simulator only helps prepare one for the real deal..in as many ways as have been experienced in real emergencies. No two emergencies are alike..nor can anyone be fully prepared for a real emergency..only trained to do the best of one’s abilities under the circumstances that exist in any particular emergency.

The simulation can be stopped in a split second ..an emergency can not.

In a simulation ones adrenalin can raise..but one knows it is not real ..

When someone volunteers for waterboarding or head torture..that volunteer knows it can be stopped immediately..

During the torture of a prisoner, that person has no control and does not know it is a simulation..they believe it is damn real.

Torture is torture..you can try your damnest to dress the pig up to be queen.. but it will still be the pig!!!!!!!!!!!

It is a crime..stop your lying to cover up the crimes that have been committed in my name and yours!

I will never accept torture in my name and I want every one of those criminals that committed those crimes held accountable by our judicial system.

We are either a nation predicated on the rule of law or we are not..you can not have it both ways.

Our laws and our constitutional laws were broken..people committed torture..those people must be held accountable..or we are nothing but a nation that tolerates torture and crimes against humanity!

My co-workers were murdered by those who committed crimes against humanity on 9/11..are we the same kind of criminals or are we better than that?????????

You can not have it both ways ..we are either a nation that believes in rule of law or we are not..

I choose to believe in the rule of law and nothing less!

Shame on you if you do not!
TeakwoodKite

Waterboarding is a simulation, and simulations when properly conducted by definition cannot result in mental or physical suffering.

You have GOT to be kidding. A frakin simulation??!!

Pull your brains out that 9 g turn your in.

When you get to that point, turn around and fly away.

You take some “rationalized” liberty with what is ILLEGAL and considered torture. Get thee behind me you immoral ignorant fool.

QUEENIE

Thank you PeggySue…you said it exactly right!!…some of these so called Americans making excuses for any of this are not Americans I would want to share air space with!!

In fact they disgust me more than words can say!!

NO TORTURE OF ANY KIND CAN BE EXCUSED..WE ARE EITHER A NATION PREDICATED ON THE RULE OF LAW , OR WE ARE NOT..THERE IS NO GREY AREA.

elise

Any reasonably civilized human being knows by his/her instinct what torture is or isn’t. It can’t be redefined according to multiple interpretations. Torture is morally repugnant and it has left stains on our country and on the souls of those responsible and the souls of those who have given their active or passive consent. Aside from my personal beliefs, interrogation experts, including LJ, have said it doesn’t elicit reliable intelligence. John McCain,who has had extensive experience on the receiving end said you will say anything the torturer wants to hear just to stop the pain. He publicly opposed Bush/Cheney on torture.
Ferd Berfle

False analogy. People line up for amusement rides. I don’t see them lining up at Gitmo. Try again.

http://liberalrapture.com/ John (from Liberal Rapture)

The lack of prosecution is moral relativity at its putrid worst.

cynic

Or maybe it’s considered enough to make the memos public, allow understanding to come slowly, and let history be the judge.

I’m not entirely sure what prosecution and full disclosure might do to our divided nation right now. I don’t think it’s moral cowardice not to want to find out. This might be about the consideration of greater risks and a sound judgement.

elise

cynic, it’s more than “moral cowardice” . It is political expedience at it’s most hypocritical. The past and present actions of our government need to be “cleansed” and there is no better way than exposing them to the light of day. I can’t tell you how sad it makes me to hear or read comments from members of the political party of my heart for over thirty years trying to rationalize the denial of justice. Is this not also doubly hypocritical if one is not really outraged over Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, Black Sites and renditions, but uses a faux indignation to get elected and not only the POUTUS, but millions of his supporters are allowed justify it and possibly even continue these despicable practices?

I Peter

There is outrage only among highly conscious people, a small minority in this country. The great mass is not outraged or demanding justice simply because they WANTED the “enemy” to be tortured. That’s the reality no one seems to want to acknowledge. The American people know they are themselves guilty, so they can’t work up too much outrage against BushCo or the CIA.

And the last thing we want to consider is how many of the tortured weren’t guilty of anything. According to the Taguba report, this would be 80-90% at Abu Ghraib who were simply rounded up in dragnets or turned in by acquaintances with personal grudges, or in Afghanistan by bounty hunters to whom we paid good money to bring us suspects.

The desire to torture is as much in the American soul, when provoked, as in anyone else’s, but because we always see our motives as noble, we won’t see it as torture. Too much self-examination is required, and we really don’t like history too much–we want to get on with things!

James

Conservative blogs are making fun of the torture reports as if they’re not that bad. They laugh at the suspect in a confined box with an insect inside as nothing serious. I want to see these assholes go through with it.

Benjamin Cardozo

That sounds like one of those “reality” TV shows where the contestant gets thrown into a pit full of snakes or cockroaches.

James

The difference is in a reality show, you can get out at any time you want. And if you’re ever in serious danger, which is almost never the case with these shows, emergency crew will move in to save you. Torture is not just confined physical pain, the mental aspects are far worse.

Try again.

candymarl

Oh come on. Pelosi said impeachment was off of the table after torture was revealed. Apparently Ms. Pelosi has no problem with Bush’s behavior. She being against impeachment and all.

This is a dog and pony show. Nothing will happen to any of these folks.

A blow job? Grounds for impeachment. Torture? Impeachment (by Democrats) is off of the table.

This is a distraction.

Next.

Ani

Yes, can you believe the grounds on which they impeached Clinton — but Bush gets away with all of this. And Obama has no problem with it either.

KmX

I think we should torture him with relentless hours of MSNBC. How about toture him with the sight of snow. A little snow flake would have him screaming. I am sure he never seen snow before. And I hate escalators. That’s torture!!!!!!!

But the greatest torture of all would be for him to see some playmates in bikinis at the bunny mansion. lol

candymarl

LMAO!

Patrick Henry

Larry…You are right again…thisIssue has been One of your Main prioritys all through the Bush Administrations Tenacious Torture Policy with Cheney as the Attack Dog…on this Issue (Among many)..

The Truth is coming out..But you Lead the Way in Pointing out The Unprecedented Abuses of Power and manipulations of the Bush administration..

I suspect that now that Obama has his hands on the Intel..and being an expert himself on the Idea that End Justifys the means..He supports a Cover Up..is trying to protect some players considered “Essential”
and believes that Some things can be done that are considered in the “Best National Interest”..

We just have a far left Wing version of the Far Right Wing Policys carried out by BUSCO.. with lots of Socialist (Marxist..?) Thinking thrown in..

Fascism comes in Many forms and degrees..it depends on How Much Power they ca “capture” and take awy from “We The People”..
http://bullmoosegal.blogspot.com bullmoosegal

Larry,

OK – you definitely have the experience and background to make this judgment call, and the law is fairly explicit. But do you really think the CIA officers should be punished for following orders in what could reasonably be argued to be on the borderline of activity (this is not a comment on the decision-makers – I’ve never reached a conclusion yet about that)? There has been some fairly significant testimony that some of the questioning did provide significant data, that wouldn’t have been obtainable by other means. Additionally, since the new Administration will not prosecute, is it the best thing for the country that the memos be released now?

Julie

Where have we heard this following orders defense? Just about ever war crimes trial in the history of mankind. At some point someone has to stand up and say NO. I am not going to do that.

The new adminstration may prosecute the people who actually wrote the memos and gave the orders and okay. That is still very much open and up to the DOJ.

TeakwoodKite

LJ, once again we have confirmed for us that BO looks away in the face of criminal conspiracy and in so doing restates his indifference and that he is an immoral human being.

Combine this with the puppy dog MSM and you have FUBAR called BO which was previously known as Bush.

I’mFedUp

Okay I posted something about the left calling Bagram “Obama’s Guantanamo Bay.” If that’s true, then the left kinda did buy a pig in a poke.

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/ Dredd

The rationale that it is “looking backward” to prosecute but “looking forward” not to prosecute begs the question “looking how far”?

Not looking past ones nose renders the direction one is looking moot:

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/04/you-must-see-past-your-nose-obama.html
Animal Control

Larry, You have a way of quickly getting to the point and I have little time to read so keep it up. Many appreciate what you do.
I Peter

There is outrage only among highly conscious people, a small minority in this country. The great mass is not outraged or demanding justice simply because they wanted the “enemy” to be tortured. That’s the reality no one seems to want to acknowledge. The American people know they are themselves guilty, so they can’t work up too much outrage against BushCo or the CIA.

And the last thing we want to consider is how many of the tortured weren’t guilty of anything. According to the Taguba report, this would be 80-90% at Abu Ghraib who were simply rounded up in dragnets or turned in by acquaintances with personal grudges, or in Afghanistan by bounty hunters to whom we paid good money to bring us suspects.

The desire to torture is as much in the American soul, when provoked, as in anyone else’s, but because we always see our motives as noble, we won’t see it as torture. Too much self-examination is required, and we really don’t like history too much–we want to get on with things!
TeakWoodKite

Not that I am surprised that BO’s DOJ would not want to prosecute the people involved, but the answer to the “why not” part of it needs illumination.

Perhaps the trail leads to the journey to the dark side.
Pingback: Torture is Torture… I will never forget the moment I saw those pictures. Here is the backstory. « Valentine Bonnaire
Retired

Larry wrote: “The law is clear.”
Apparently to at least four former Justice department lawyers, one of whom is now a Federal judge, the law was clearly different from the way Larry and many others, including myself, interpret it.
What this episode shows more clearly than any hypothetical from Harvard Law School the extreme danger when a POTUS (in this case, Bush) has such a remarkably flawed character and is assisted by willing accomplices (the DoJ lawyers) who are equally flawed. Their immoral actions have now led to a Hobsonian choice for their successors of doing the right thing and thus prompting a Constitutional crisis in so doing by in effect declaring, for the first time in our nation’s history, that an Attorney General’s legal opinion cannot be relied upon by Americans acting in an official capacity or, alternatively, acting to not prompt said Constitutional crisis and thus essentially sanctioning illegal and immoral behavior by Americans acting in an official capacity on our behalf.
Either way, we lose. Thanks, George!
Pingback: Make Them Accountable / Media & Politics (one section only today)
RebelCarol

Larry how then do we extract information from the enemy if we don’t do some form of torture? We can’t coddle them for God’s sake.

Nudity? Bugs? Give me a break! Waterboarding? If waterboarding gets the information needed to keep America safe, then I say go for it. These incarcerated combatants were not in an organized State military wearing a uniform, they were/are terrorists therefore, they do not have the umbrella of the Geneva Conventions.

America is becoming the laughing stock of the world faster than it did under GWB. We are now considered weak.
Julie

Larry,

Great to see you are again writing about something you know and not just Obama bashing.

I think you need to get off this boring Obama bashing. It is getting old.

Too many nuts have taken over your website.

Get back to some of your more insightful posts. It is way more valuable than all the nutty anti-obama posts on here and your circle of 100 or so NQbots that spend every waking hour looking for ways to slime and smear our President.