WP: CIA Puts Harsh Tactics On Hold

[kskiska]

Memo on Methods Of Interrogation Had Wide Review

Sunday, June 27, 2004; Page A01

The CIA has suspended the use of extraordinary interrogation techniques approved by the White House pending a review by Justice Department and other administration lawyers, intelligence officials said.

The "enhanced interrogation techniques," as the CIA calls them, include feigned drowning and refusal of pain medication for injuries. The tactics have been used to elicit intelligence from al Qaeda leaders such as Abu Zubaida and Khalid Sheik Mohammed.

Current and former CIA officers aware of the recent decision said the suspension reflects the CIA's fears of being accused of unsanctioned and illegal activities, as it was in the 1970s. The decision applies to CIA detention facilities, such as those around the world where the agency is interrogating al Qaeda leaders and their supporters, but not military prisons at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere.

"Everything's on hold," said a former senior CIA official aware of the agency's decision. "The whole thing has been stopped until we sort out whether we are sure we're on legal ground." A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the issue.

CIA interrogations will continue but without the suspended techniques, which include feigning suffocation, "stress positions," light and noise bombardment, sleep deprivation, and making captives think they are being interrogated by another government.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8534-2004Jun26.html

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. Why not, it probably didn't work anyway, and led to a whole bunch

of trouble.

[meisje]

2. What about at the secret prisons?

business as usual?

[struggle4progress]

4. Support UN calls to allow visits. eom

[hansolsen]

3. Nixon: "I am not a crook". Bush, "I did not approve torture".

"The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on.
Not all your piety nor all your wit can lure it back
To cancel half a line."


When the compendiums of historical quotes for Tricky Dick Nixon were sent to the press they included his famous disclaimer, "I am not a crook".

When Bush 43 is reduced to famous quotes for history, who now doubts that among them will be, "I never approved torture".

The bastard. The dirty bastard.

[thebigidea]

5. its time to put the Bush/Cheney mob on hold...

[hansolsen]

6. Dana Priest is a hero of the realm

Going back well before the war was launched and right to this fine article, Dana Priest has been a bright shining light in dead forest of chicken shit reporters who rolled over for the Bush administration.

I nominate her for a Pulitzer Prize right now.

[Edmond Dantes]

7. WH influences supposedly objective legal opinions?

"A Justice Department official said Tuesday at a briefing that the office went "beyond what was asked for," but other lawyers and administration officials said the memo was approved by the department's criminal division and by the office of Attorney General John D. Ashcroft.

"In addition, Timothy E. Flanigan -- then deputy White House counsel -- discussed a draft of the document with lawyers at the Office of Legal Counsel before it was finalized, the officials said. David S. Addington, Cheney's counsel, also weighed in with remarks during at least one meeting he held with Justice lawyers involved with writing the opinion. He was particularly concerned, sources said, that the opinion include a clear-cut section on the president's authority."

<snip>

So the client (White House) made sure that the legal opinion by its "outside counsel" said exactly what the WH wanted it to say.

I wonder if any private entities (e.g., contractors hired to conduct investigations) had any input in the legal opinion by perhaps submitting "background information" that might "inform" OLC's legal analysis? I know for fact that this has happened before in OLC. It would be outrageous if one outside constituency (paid torturers) had input when other constituencies (Amnesty International, e.g.) did not because they didn't know the legal opinion was in the works.

Dana Priest is asking the right questions of the right people. She should also be talking to current Deputy White House Counsel David Leitch, who was an OLC Deputy Asst. Attorney General in Bush I, FAA General Counsel on 9/11, and replaced Flanigan as Deputy White House Counsel. Leitch is a former Rehnquist clerk and maintains close ties with the Chief.

It would also be interesting to know whether Ted Olson participated in any of these discussions. As a former Asst. Attorney General for OLC, it would be awfully tempting for him to insinuate himself in the process. And, of course, he was subject to an Independent Counsel investigation when he was Asst. Attorney General for OLC.

[Edmond Dantes]

8. addendum

Just saw this in a WP article from 6/24:

"While his departure at the end of the Supreme Court term is not a surprise, Olson is known inside the Justice Department to be unhappy that he was not informed about controversial memos authored by the Office of Legal Counsel on the use of harsh interrogation methods on detainees overseas, according to a department official who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue.

"Olson was among the last remaining Justice officials who helped craft the administration's controversial and aggressive legal strategy on terrorism after the attacks. His departure closely follows the announcement last week that the head of the OLC, Jack L. Goldsmith III, also is resigning."

I'm going to make 2 educated guesses here.

First, I do not believe for one moment that Olson was not informed about the legal memoranda. As a former OLC Asst. Attorney General, Olson knows exactly how OLC works and the SG's Office works closely with OLC on many issues. In fact, Olson once promoted his right-hand Gibson Dunn partner, Douglas R. Cox, for the position of OLC Asst. Attorney General. (Cox has some skeletons in his closet, however, and former Deputy White House Counsel Flanigan may well have blocked that nomination on account of those skeletons.) There's no way Olson would have been kept in the dark.

Second, in light of current OLC chief Jack Goldsmith's departure, the reason for Olson's departure becomes more transparent. The decision to have the controversial OLC memo rewritten was -- in all likelihood -- made by White House Counsel Gonzales. Goldsmith and Olson are resigning because they vehemently disagree with the White House decision to backpedal from the OLC memo and the lawyer who signed it.

Gonzales has always been viewed as too moderate by neocons such as Olson. Olson was previously irate over Gonzales' "meddling" in the Michigan affirmative action case that went to the Supreme Court. I can see how this backpedaling would be the last straw for him.

You have to remember that Olson and his ilk believed that KEN STARR was too moderate when he served as Solicitor General! I know that sounds hard to believe, but I promise you it's 100% true.

[Jacobin]

9. "harsh tactics?"

What? The WP can't bring itself to say the "T" word?

Bunch a fuckin pussies.

It's "TORTURE"

Say it loud, say it proud. The government the WP has rooted for, the invasion it rooted for uses fucking TORTURE.