Bush Administration Issued New Definition Of What Constitutes Torture Of

An Enemy Prisoner During Interrogation:

U.S. Revamps
Policy on Torture
Of War Prisoners
Legal Guidance Criticizes
Aggressiveness of Old Rules,
Redefines 'Severe Pain'

By JESS BRAVIN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 31, 2004; Page A1

The Bush administration issued a new definition of what constitutes torture of an enemy prisoner during interrogation, sharply scaling back its previous legal position that inflicting pain approaching that of organ failure or death was lawful, and retreating from earlier assertions that the president can authorize torture.

The 17-page memorandum issued by the Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department unit that provides definitive legal guidance for the executive branch, replaces a 50-page opinion issued in August 2002 that offered a legal framework to justify inflicting agony on prisoners and contended President Bush could set aside laws and treaties prohibiting torture.

The new document also concludes that the 2002 memo was wrong when it found that only "excruciating and agonizing pain" constituted torture, and that prosecution for committing torture was only possible if the defendant's goal was simply to inflict pain, rather than to extract information. "There is no exception under the statute permitting torture to be used for a 'good reason,' " the new memo concludes, even if the aim is "to protect national security."
TORTURE MEMO

Read the full text of the Justice Department's 17-page memo on torture. (Adobe Acrobat required)

Still, the memo concludes that even under its wider definition of torture, none of the interrogation methods previously approved by the Justice Department would be illegal.

(Entire Article In Wall Street Journal)

geezzz, sadly I suspect the Dems will let it slide, but I hope not.

The new document also concludes that the 2002 memo was wrong when it found that only "excruciating and agonizing pain" constituted torture,

Oh, my...

Still, it's not about humanity, it's all about "what can we get away with?"

I have yet to see them admit or change anything because it is the right thing to do.

go up and down. The Dem were once in this place so guess we will be back. It always goes back