"CONSTITUTION WAS NOT IN PLAY" - "Laws Didn't Apply" - Justice Dept Releases John Yoo Torture Memo

Justice Dept Releases John Yoo Torture Memo
By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:24:29 PM EST

The Justice Department today released John Yoo's 2003 torture memo http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/justice_dept_releases_interrog.html to Congress. This is the infamous memo that the Bush Administration relied on in justifying it's "harsh interrorgation techniques" on prisoners overseas. This was the memo that was in force when the Abu Ghraib detainees were subjected to cruel treatment and torture.

Part One of the memo is here, and Part Two is here (pdf.)

Shorter version: Yoo wrote the Constitution is not in play.

In the March 14, 2003 memo, Yoo says the Constitution was not in play with regard to the interrogations because the Fifth Amendment (which provides for due process of law) and the Eighth Amendment (which prevents the government from employing cruel and usual punishment) does "not extend to alien enemy combatants held abroad.":

The memo goes on to explain that federal criminal statutes regarding assault and other crimes against the body don't apply to authorized military interrogations overseas and that statutes that do apply to the conduct of U.S. officials abroad pertaining to war crimes and torture establish a limited obligation on the part of interrogators to refrain from bodily harm.

The memo also says the Geneva Conventions don't apply al-Qaida and the Taliban.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/4/1/222429/3656

********************

MORE:


Memo: Laws Didn't Apply to Interrogators
Justice Dept. Official in 2003 Said President's Wartime Authority Trumped Many Statutes

By Dan Eggen and Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 2, 2008; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102213_pf.html

The Justice Department sent a legal memorandum to the Pentagon in 2003 asserting that federal laws prohibiting assault, maiming and other crimes did not apply to military interrogators who questioned al-Qaeda captives because the president's ultimate authority as commander in chief overrode such statutes.

The 81-page memo, which was declassified and released publicly yesterday, argues that poking, slapping or shoving detainees would not give rise to criminal liability. The document also appears to defend the use of mind-altering drugs that do not produce "an extreme effect" calculated to "cause a profound disruption of the senses or personality."

Although the existence of the memo has long been known, its contents have not been previously disclosed.

Welcome to the nightmare.

What you are really saying is that any other form of Government will more likely lead to torture, and I just don't think that is an accurate statement. Only one example comes immediately to mind (exceptions do not prove rules, they disprove them) and that would be Tibet before th Dali Lama was expelled. The nation was not a democracy, it was a theocracy, and yet because of the morality of the people and the nation's leader there was no chance that anyone would or even could be tortured in the name of the country.

And that pretty much says it all. If the people and the leader of the country are moral then there will be no torture. So your statement would have been true if it read 'if a moral country can torture then anyone can' but then of course it would toss us into the bin with the rest of the immoral countries.

they haven't been paying attention. This has been party line for five years.

And apparently they were right.

Monsters.

lawlessness triumphs. I do wish upon a star, for organized groups to do The Right Thing. Me, I am only able to dialog. Peace

when it's so much more entertaining to torture, and capture the memories with Kodak?

I am ashamed that he is a Californian.

It's that simple.

its going to be fun watching these folks slowly twisting in the wind cause they as sure as I set here today will be.

STOP MINCING WORDS DESCRIBING THE BEHAVIOR!!!

damn it

TORTURE! PEOPLE WERE TORTURED! PEOPLE ARE BEING T-O-R-T-U-R-E-D!

Those who are willing to describe the behavior as 'harsh interrogation techniques' should be FULLY subjected to them,...and given a 2nd chance to describe the behavior, IMHO.

They are criminals.

You wouldn't accept that from a six-year-old, would you?

Yet we have an entire DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy -- including Dems -- complicitly nodding along.

Impeachment remains our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

----

:kick:

Wasn't it the malAdministrations responsibility to defend her actions? The sexual humiliation of prisoners is hardly a blip when compared to murder under torture. Where does THAT line for prosecution form?

I despise what's been done in our name, but the only way to wake up the sheeple is to rub their noses in the WH approved policies and legal wrangling that have got us where we are. The hick-chick from WV wasn't running Abu G., nor was she responsible for the policies that allowed what went on there (as if we're naive enough to believe it's not still going on).

The Pres. of the US stated that Enhanced Interrogation was necessary to protect Amerika against
Terrorists. The methods of Enhanced Interrogation have saved thousands of lives is his claim. Has he offered one shred of proof to his claim?

:wow: