Is this the memo(or one of) that Ashcroft is holding?

[Elbowroom]

http://msnbc.com/modules/newsweek/pdf/gonzales_memo.pdf

[Elbowroom]

1. anybody....

anybody know?

[Spazito]

2. I think so, among others....

the memos that are being leaked were NEVER given to Congress as is the legal requirement. There is, without doubt, other memos and probably a Presidential Finding (Executive Order) signed by bush authorizing contravention of the Geneva Conventions in the treatment of prisoners. Given the way that Ashcroft refused to hand over any memos even though they are not classified tells me there are even more damaging memos that have yet to see the light of day.

[kentuck]

3. Pretty damning...

Even if it's only for al Qaeda and Taliban..

[LizW]

4. No, there is at least one more

This is the Gonzalez memo, originated in the White House. But it seems pretty clear from the stories in the Washington Post and New York Times today that there was a memo written by lawyers in the Pentagon, at the request of the CIA, that said the President could order those under his command to ignore any laws or treaties for purposes of national security.

It seems to me that Gonzalez based his memo on the Pentagon memo, but I have not read that anywhere.

It is the Pentagon memo, and any Presidential directives written pursuant to it, that Ashcroft is refusing to produce. (Although there may be other stuff no one knows about yet.)

[kentuck]

5. He is commenting on the Dept of Justice memo (Ashcroft)

from a week previous. Since it is pdf form, I am not able to past text. However, I did read it carefully.

The Secretary of State (Powell) recommended against it as did the legal advisers at the State Dept.

Gonzales gave the argument for and against. In the final analysis, he decided that the Geneva Convention rules for POW could be ignored, even though there might be criticism from abroad and domestically.

One point against it was that it "could undermine the military culture which emphasizes the highest standards of conduct in combat.." Very prophetic, I would say.

Bottom line is that it was the pResident's decision and it was the Attorney General's responsibility to interpret the law.

The question that arises is, was this carried over to the War in Iraq? Is that why they insist on calling it part of the "war on terrorism"?

[ElementaryPenguin]

6. Plus the presidential directive signed by Bushler authorizing torture

Which might be a tough one for the Nazi corporate press whores to spin in a positive fashion! Nice guy Georgie Poorgie, the WAR CRIMINAL!!

:mad:
:argh:

[Jacobin]

7. Isn't the WH trying to get this Gonzales freak on the bench?

An appeal court seat?

[kentuck]

8. Everyone should read this if htey get the time...

Very, very informative...They were conscious of war crimes all the time they were advising Dubya...