The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, after consultation with Attorney General Eric Holder, just issued a declassified narrative of how the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel came to approve the CIA’s enhanced interrogation program. You can read the report at the committee’s website, but I want to focus on one brief aspect of it:
In July 2007, the President issued Executive Order 13440, which interpreted the additional obligations of the United States imposed by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. In conjunction with release of that Executive Order, OLC issued a legal opinion analyzing the legality of the interrogation techniques currently authorized for use in the CIA program under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the Detainee Treatment Act, and the War Crimes Act.
The Washington Independent — and in particular, moi — broke the story of the existence of that memo yesterday. Just saying. This is the first clear, declarative public acknowledgment by any government authority that the 2007 OLC memo exists. Here’s an interesting omission that the Senate intelligence panel found within it:
Because waterboarding was not among the authorized list of techniques, the 2007 OLC opinion did not address the legality of waterboarding. OLC therefore has not considered the legality of waterboarding under either of the two provisions that have been applied to the CIA’s treatment of detainees since the passage of the Detainee Treatment Act in December of 2005: Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and the War Crimes Act, as amended by the MCA.
The panel ends its narrative by reiterating that the Obama administration has said "the United States Government may not rely on interpretations of the law governing interrogations issued by the Department of Justice between September 11, 2001, and January 20, 2009."
Crossposted to The Streak.
Login Here




17 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
Maybe this 2007 memo is the one Cheney wants released, with its wonderful, comprehensive summary of everything torture yielded. Yeah, that’s the ticket, and it certainly explains why Obama & Holder held it back, too.
shorter read:
“Counter Coup successful, Restoration has occurred, all statements of junta in charge of our government for last 8 years disavowed.”
Now if we only prosecute …
Attackerman… You’ve been on fire! Mad props to you, amigo.
No wonder Rove was shitting himself.
Just remember, kiddies: Rome wasn’t dismantled in a day.
Historical overview on waterboarding, including the 1983 Texas sheriff who was successfully prosecuted by Reagan’s DOJ for subjecting prisoners to the torture. Twenty-six years later we’re having to petition our DOJ to prosecute for the same crime.
http://www.npr.org/templates/s…..d=15886834
http://tinyurl.com/5m6kga
http://www.securitylawbrief.co…..ners-.html
http://tinyurl.com/dhnes4
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and the War Crimes Act, as amended by the MCA.
I smell loopholes…
I’m glad that’s clear so that we can all look forward.
Um, isn’t that a rather remarkable, blanket position to take. Why was that step necessary, what were the errors in OLC’s function, including its written memoranda, that required that unusual step? What wrongs were committed based on the faulty work of an entire office within the DoJ?
Are we to believe this was the only DoJ function whose work was so tainted that it has been tossed out in its entirety.
Huge. Huge.
Thanks, Spencer.
The bit you’ve excerpted is NOT a loophole.
It’s a flagrant violation of the treaty signed by the U.S.; no U.S. law can amend the treaty itself, it can only modify U.S. law.
I’d call it a rent or tear or a breach rather than a loophole.
The commander at Abu Graib is on KO.
no U.S. law can amend the treaty itself, it can only modify U.S. law.
right. what the MCA did was to provide the ‘official U.S. interpretation’ of what activities constitute torture under the Conventions, I believe.
And the MCA is still good law, in the sense that it has never been overturned.
Therefore, a defense based upon the interpretations of the MCA, which restrict the definition of “torture” to things like murder, rape, or kidnapping of families, remains viable, imo.
and way pissed….
BTW the picture on the header of waterboarding on the main FDL branch…the “subject” is placed the wrong way. Should be head down.
Congrats Spencer on the shoutout by Rachel for your FOIA request for the Zelikow memo…!
I hope my dog named spencer gets a little of his brain power from having the same name as you. Thanks for all of the great reporting from your site. One of the first reads in the morning and one of the last at night.
” The Times’ details come from an unclassified version of a Senate report on the Pentagon’s treatment of detainees in the war on terrorism that was released last night. In addition to all the above, the report, according to Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent, who got a look yesterday, shows that there was some internal awareness that torture didn’t produce reliable results. The military had by and large long ago concluded that the Korean war-era techniques wrested false confessions from US soldiers, and one present-day adviser said that “the likelihood that the use of physical pressures will increase the delivery of accurate information from a detainee is very low.” “
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm…..emos-obama