DOJ: No misconduct for Bush interrogation lawyers

DOJ: No misconduct for Bush interrogation lawyers

Justice Department lawyers showed "poor judgment" but did not commit professional misconduct when they authorized CIA interrogators to use waterboarding and other harsh tactics at the height of the U.S. war on terrorism, an internal review released Friday found.

The decision closes the book on one of the major lingering investigations into the counterterrorism policies of George W. Bush's administration. President Barack Obama campaigned on abolishing the simulated drowning technique of waterboarding and other tactics that he called torture, but he left open the question of whether anyone would be punished for authorizing such methods.

Link

I can only wonder how much they would have blamed President Bush had methods like this not been employed and we would have been attacked again?

It is so easy to sit on the sidelines and make determinations. Sit behind keyboards and throw accusations, but much more difficult to be on the front lines, making those decisions, that while unpopular; save lives.

Semper

[edit on 2/21/2010 by semperfortis]

President Bush: I can hear you! I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you! And the people -- and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!

Rescue Workers: [Chanting] U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!

source

At that point of time I think we all would have condoned bamboo shanks under the finger nails of the murderers.

What should we do? Put them up in some prison in Illinois, give them hot tea and say please tell us everything you know when ever you feel comfortable about it.

You people will always win from now on, and this is why (hit the link below). The world is a much darker place than most people will ever suspect.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The only real chance this nation has is to take out the next generation of "leaders" while they're still in prep schools. Then, let the American Aristocracy die off through old age. Other than that, the game is over.

reply to post by semperfortis


Obama is playing the typical game that is played by politicians everywhere he is smoothing over public opinion without any change in policy . You don't have to be a genius to work that because no one is to be punished for what has happened that it can well happen in the future with unofficial sanction . While I am not defending the decision not to prosecute it really must be said that to many fingers were or are in the pie for this to happen . Political witch hunts and or making scarp(SP?) goats is far worse then simply not laying criminal chargers . Oh and this more proof that Obama mantra of change that is was elected on is fraudulent or a hoax take your pick .

No amount of rationalization and excuses will change the fact that waterboarding is torture. It's a crime under US and international law. The Bush administration and their cheerleaders can call it whatever they want, come up with euphemisms for it, but waterboarding is torture and torture is a crime.

You claim that “those decisions saved lives,” a claim that, quite frankly, is still up for debate, but even if it did, doesn't change the fact that it is a crime. Convenience is not a compelling legal argument.

If the Bush administration thought waterboarding was something they had to do, then they should have repealed all the federal laws and opted out of all the international treaties that ban torture, like the Geneva Conventions, or the UN Convention Against Torture signed by Pres. Reagan in 1988.

But they didn't, instead they tried to work their way around the law, knowing the implications of their actions—in a January 25 2002 memo to the President, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales argues that opting out of the Geneva Convention “substantially reduces the likelihood of prosecution under the War Crimes Act” (p. 2); Attorney General Ashcroft inquired John Yoo on the feasibility of “advanced pardons” at the request of the CIA as reported in the OPR report (p. 55).

You say that it is “easy to sit on the sidelines and make determinations.” Yes, indeed it is. But I didn't make the oath to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution. Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Ashcroft and others, on the other hand, did.

Isn't it easier to make the difficult decisions when you don't care about the Constitution and the law? Being on the sidelines and making determinations is not a crime. Violating the Constitution is.

Originally posted by semperfortis

I can only wonder how much they would have blamed President Bush had methods like this not been employed and we would have been attacked again?

It is so easy to sit on the sidelines and make determinations. Sit behind keyboards and throw accusations, but much more difficult to be on the front lines, making those decisions, that while unpopular; save lives.

Semper

Saved lives?!?
I think you meant to say saved American lives... because if you ask the families of the 10's - maybe 100's of thousands of dead Iraqi, Afghanistani, and Pakistani citizens, OR the thousands of dead American soldiers, they'd probably disagree with you.

[edit on 22-2-2010 by mecheng]