Former Bush Official Zelikow Decries Bush Interrogation Techniques

The GOP is just out right stupid.

People who do terrible things to others rely on denial. They refuse to face the reality of their actions. Pretending torture wasn't torture is just a lie to tell yourself to get what you want or protect people you side with. Its an evasion of reality.

The law is about reality. There should, at the very least, be a full investigation and it should include anyone who made these decisions - Republican, Democrat, or unbeliever. Our country's reputation is at stake. We will be judged cowards in the future if we do not look squarely at what was done. For all our faults the U.S. has fought torture throughout most of its history. We cannot look the other way.

>>>>

I find it fascinating that many Americans were screwed over by everyone from fraudelent loan officers to crooked CEO's losing much of their investments, retirement, and home values and we are investigating the interrogation techniques used on those who killed thousands. Where is the outrage over a lack of investigation of both business people and dirty politicans? The people in power during 9/11 were in a very unique and demanding situation. America wanted justice and wanted the adminstration to keep us safe. That is what they did. Lets go after the real criminals - the ones who stole money from us and now are being bailed out with more of our money.

Posted by: ms1236 | Apr 23, 2009 10:20:37 PM<<<<
Why don't you provide the legal basis for prosecuting these guys who stole the money, which incidentally was allowed by the same set of people being looked at today? And which news channels have you been watching that you have not heard the outrage? You must have very limited ability to understand simple logic. This is not an question about what we think is right. Or whether we want it to happen or not. In fact I personally dont care what happens to terrorist per se. This is not a judgement call. What is at issue is: Did the USA break the UNCAT law against torture? Did they twist and rewrite their own definition to allow torture? Who were the peole responsible? If the investigation showed complicit involvement by any number of the Bushies, should we follow the rule of the Law and punish them accordingly. Heck we just deported an 89 year old man who is thought to have committed serious war crimes, to Germany, keping him on life support so he can be tried!
You should pay attention to "Enough" and "dantheguy".

So, if we refuse to use waterboarding, how do find out who stole the lunch money in 9th grade?

I strongly agree with the statement ... We are Americans... We don't torture. It does not matter whether torture worked or did not work. The point is the Constitution was violated & International laws were broken.

We do not torture, and torture is a crime, not a method. If you want to work for a government and want to torture someone, you need to find another country. Government employees take an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. If you are a government official and torture someone, you have failed your oath to defend the U.S. Constitution and you have broken the law. We do not need or want people working in our government that conducted torture.

There is no way anyone can respect the CIA if it rewards torture interrogators with their job. Abscense of morality in any government agency will not result in respect, ether now or in the future. This controversy is not about legal opinions & the CIA its about the CYA mentality of the Bush Administration.

At the Nuremberg trials in 1946, the U.S., England, and France decided that just taking orders is not excuse for torture. Concentration Camp commander's defended their actions as just taking orders. No doubt Nazi lawyers declared their actions both necessary and legal under German Third Reicht Law. At Nuremberg in 1946, the decision by the U.S., France, and England was unanimous, that a person is responsible for their own actions. No orders or shadow legality is a defense against a complete loss of morality. The trials at Nuremberg set the standard. Just taking orders does not give anyone, not even an American, the right to torture another person . We do not want our country to have Nazi morality standards.

I hope we still have today as much moral strength as our fathers that fought WWII to save our country and save our Constitution. If government officials today trash our Constitution to gain immediate ends, then we have lost any meaningful difference between our enemies and ourselves.

We are America, and We don't torture. Our Constitution and our morality are worth far more than any information obtained from torture. The ends do not justify the means.

We are Americans, and We don't torture. NO IF ANDS OR BUTS ABOUT IT ! See title 18 sec. 241 & 242 if you do torture, this is what you can expect from the law.

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights

This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).

It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

As for a distinction of foreigners and Americans, what if the terrorists are American citizens, then they should not be subjected to "torture"? Or what if they are incorrectly identified as terrorists (they come to your house due to a computer error, or a nosy revengeful neighbor), is torturing innocent people ok? Perhaps throwing them in jail, because of a revengeful snitch wants to mess with your life (or as is the case with some Guantanamo detainies, snitches who got money for pointing the finger at anyone).

Jason, the constitutional problem lies in the idea that it is setting legal precedent that waterboarding and some of these other tactics are not torture, are not cruel and unusual punishment - which is banned by the Bill of Rights. If legal precedent is set that these activities not cruel and unusual punishment, then they could be used on Americans by police. Do you really want to be treated like this. Can you imagine what the police could have done, say, for example, to the lacrosse players at Duke who had been (falsely) accused of rape? What if they had waterboarded them 183 times each and they finally confessed to gangraping that woman, -- if the defense is that as long as doctors and psychologists were supervising is wasn't really that bad -- Is that the America you really want us to be?

zepa, zepa, zepa...sigh!

Uh, we are a single nation sharing a large orb rotating in space who happens to be bound by INTERNATIONAL laws as well as domestic...it's that thingy that helps this nation, and others,to avoid global genocide threatened by the whim of psychopath's and sociopaths who want to rape and pillage others natural resources and treasure.

Now...go watch cartoons.

Gee GW demanded a witch hunt and his party members didn't started a witch hunt against him for demanding it.

Curious how - now - the party's "Christian Nation, ethics and honesty, personal responsibility and accountability" mantra has faded into a deafening silence when the Hague isn't a stop off for beer and sausages..

"I call on all governments to join with the United States... in prohibiting, investigating, and prosecuting all acts of torture." -George W. Bush, 6/26/03

To summarize my previous post, the supreme law of the United States includes the following provisions:

(1) The definition of torture includes intentional mental suffering.
(2) You can't evade responsibility for torture by moving it offshore.
(3) You can't use the threat of any emergency WHATSOEVER, as an excuse to torture.
(4) You can't use "following orders" as an excuse to torture.
(5) Prohibitions extend to acts beyond torture and include ANY cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment when
such acts are committed in an official capacity by a public official of the U.S.

If you're going to argue against those points, be prepared for an
uphill battle. The language of the treaty is about as cut-and-dried
as such things can be, and our participation in it has never been revoked.

Tell Jose Padilla it's claptrap.

There has to be a destinction between a foriegn terrorist and an American citizen. I beleive the constitution was made for the legal dwellers of this country. All our enemies from the beginning of this nation have tortured our soldiers far more than we have ever considered doing to them. Some of our prison inmates would probably like to be treated as good as the animals in guantonimo bay. (I think the world is like a spoiled rich man's child, The more the U.S. helps and gives them, the more they hate us.)

Well, war is war.
Nice guys lose wars.
It is us or them.
So, what is the point?
It is anti-american to witch-hunt CIA.

Next time you see one of our brave soldiers in your town please express your support for torture, let them know you look forward that if they are captured you find no problem with waterboarding or any of the SERE program being used on them. Because if we are a nation of laws and somehow stand for the moral highground, we need to expect “to do unto others”.

HUFFPOST Declined to post above COMMENT

"In other words, Americans in any town of this country could constitutionally be hung from the ceiling naked, sleep deprived, water-boarded, and all the rest -- if the alleged national security justification was compelling."

The individuals who were interrogated were not Americans. They were enemy combatants religiously devoted to the killing of Americans. If libs so no difference between Al-Zarqawi and an American citizen protected under the Bill of Rights, then we might as well just surrender the War on Terror now.

I want to be clear and I hope others agree. The reality is you, me or any other citizen is expendable if our founding principles are at stake. To be clear if presented with the question, do we break or for go our principles against torture to protect 1 or 3000 lives unfortunately we as a nation lose who we are if we bend our moral principles. You should know by living in this great free country if it comes down to you, me or anyone else Mr President. You are not more important than our guiding moral principles and foundations and as a citizen you scarify your life for the great good.

I think if we are devoting all this time to this subject, we should be devoting equal time to the truly inhumane torture done to U.S. citizens, like filmed beheading of live people, you all should be forced to watch this. What if this were your son, dad of father? Even still, I have seen so many young children raped, strangled, stuffed in suitcases, and even buried alive. Yet they are not protected by our legislature or states. I have seen way more people tortured in thses ways than we waterboarded. Please do not hide behind the constitution and the so called horror of pouring water on a foreign combatant's face when you can't even comfront the truly greusome horrors at home.

Austin: You're right. Waterboarding has been around for a long time. It was used in the Spanish Inquisition, by the Japanese during WWII (for which we prosecuted them), Khmer Rouge, and now the U.S.

To the rest: I've read through the last 84 posts. The discussion though heated has been mostly civil. Thank you.

Torture has been in existence as long as human being exists. Waterboarding is nothing new in history of human being, Bush and Cheney can not claim credit for this kind of torture to show that they are dedicated to the prevention of terrorist attack in US. The incident of 9/11 can be readily prevented by better airport security control, pilot arming and the use of air marshall.

Blair's statements, the CIA's stance and Porter Goss's assessment are all consistent.
***********************
Of course they are and I don't blame them! They broke the law. The US is being investigated into what we have done and you better believe they are going to protect themselves as there could be an attempt to try them for war crimes.

I do not think they should be prosecuted and agree with Obama that we do not need to get bogged down in a Congressional investigation.

However, I do believe the lawyers, one of whom is sitting federal court judge, who provided the bogus legal cover for the US to torture resulting in our breaking laws and sacrificing our constitution should be held to account.

gotta run - have a great day!