Share

Obama: No Charges for Harsh CIA Investigation

by: Jennifer Loven and Devlin Barrett  |  The Associated Press

photo
Attorney General Eric Holder. (Photo: AP)

    Washington - President Barack Obama absolved CIA officers from prosecution for harsh, painful interrogation of terror suspects Thursday, even as his administration released Bush-era memos graphically detailing - and authorizing - such grim tactics as slamming detainees against walls, waterboarding them and keeping them naked and cold for long periods.

    Human rights groups and many Obama officials have condemned such methods as torture. Bush officials have vigorously disagreed.

    In releasing the documents, the most comprehensive accounting yet of interrogation methods that were among the Bush administrations most closely guarded secrets, Obama said he wanted to move beyond "a dark and painful chapter in our history."

Also see below:      President Obama's Statement on the Memos    β€’

    Past and present CIA officials had unsuccessfully pressed for more parts of the four legal memos to be kept secret, and some critics argued the release would make the United States less safe.

    Michael Hayden, who led the CIA under George W. Bush, said CIA officers will now be more timid and allies will be more reluctant to share sensitive intelligence.

    "If you want an intelligence service to work for you, they always work on the edge. That's just where they work," Hayden said. Now, he argued, foreign partners will be less likely to cooperate with the CIA because the release shows they "can't keep anything secret."

    On the other side, human rights advocates argued that Obama should not have assured the CIA that officers who conducted interrogations would not be prosecuted if they used methods authorized by Bush lawyers in the memos.

    Obama disagreed, saying in a statement, "Nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

    The Bush administration memos describe the tough interrogation methods used against 28 terror suspects, the fullest and now complete government accounting of the techniques. They range from waterboarding - simulated drowning - to using a plastic neck collar to slam detainees into walls.

    Other methods were more psychological than violent. One technique approved but never used involved putting a detainee who had shown a fear of insects into a box filled with caterpillars.

    The documents also offer justification for using the tough tactics.

    A May 30, 2005, memo says that before the harsher methods were used on top al-Qaida detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he refused to answer questions about pending plots against the United States.

    "Soon, you will know," he told them, according to the memo.

    It says the interrogations later extracted details of a plot called the "second wave" to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into a building in Los Angeles.

    Terror plots that were disrupted, the memos say, include the alleged effort by Jose Padilla to detonate a "dirty bomb" spreading nuclear radiation.

    Even as they exposed new details of the interrogation program, Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, offered the first definitive assurance that the CIA officials who were involved are in the clear, as long as their actions were in line with the legal advice at the time.

    Holder went further, telling the CIA the government would provide free legal representation to its employees in any legal proceeding or congressional investigation related to the program and would repay any financial judgment.

    "It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department," Holder said.

    Obama said in his statement and a separate letter sent directly to CIA employees that the nation must protect their identity "as vigilantly as they protect our security."

    Current CIA Director Leon Panetta said in a message to his employees: "CIA responded, as duty requires."

    Some parts of the memos were blacked out, and Panetta had pushed for more redactions, according to a government official who declined to be named because he was not authorized to release the information.

    The CIA has acknowledged using waterboarding on three high-level terror detainees in 2002 and 2003, with the authorization of the White House and the Justice Department. Hayden said waterboarding has not been used since, but some human rights groups have urged Obama to hold CIA employees accountable for what they, and many Obama officials, say was torture.

    The memos produced by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in 2002 and 2005 were released to meet a court-approved deadline in a lawsuit against the government in New York by the American Civil Liberties Union.

    "It's impossible not to be shocked by the contents of these memos," said ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer. "The memos should never have been written, but we're pleased the new administration has made them public."

    In addition to detailing individual techniques, one memo also specifically authorized a method for combining multiple methods, a practice human rights advocates argue crosses the line into torture even if any individual methods does not.

    The methods authorized in the memos include keeping detainees naked, keeping them in painful standing positions and keeping their cells cold for long periods of time. Other techniques include depriving them of solid food and slapping them. Sleep deprivation, prolonged shackling and threats to a detainee's family were also used.

    Interrogators were told not to allow a prisoner's body temperature or food intake to fall below a certain level, because either could cause permanent damage, said senior administration officials.

    The Obama administration last month released nine legal memos from the Bush administration. It probably will release more as the ACLU lawsuit proceeds, the officials said.

    The lawsuit has sought to use the Freedom of Information Act to shed light on the treatment of prisoners - though the Bush administration eventually abandoned many of the legal conclusions put forth in the memos and the Obama administration has gone further to actively dismantle much of President Bush's anti-terror program.

    Obama has ordered the CIA's secret overseas prisons known as "black sites" closed and has ended "extraordinary renditions" of terrorism suspects to other countries if there is any reason to believe those countries would torture them. He has also restricted CIA questioning to methods and protocols approved for use by the U.S. military until a complete review of the program is conducted.

    Also on Thursday, Holder formally revoked every legal opinion or memo issued during Bush's presidency that justified interrogation programs.

    The documents have been the subject of a long, fierce debate inside and outside government over how much should be revealed about the previous administration's approach.

    In his statement, Obama said he was reassured about the potential national security implications by the fact that much of the information contained had already been widely publicized - including some of it by Bush himself - and by the fact that the program no longer exists as it did.

    Withholding the memos, Obama argued, would only serve to deny facts already in the public domain.

    "This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States," the president said.

    Those assurances are not likely to inoculate Obama against criticism from conservatives. Last month, former Vice President Dick Cheney said that Obama's decisions to revoke Bush-era terrorist detainee policies will "raise the risk to the American people of another attack."

    --------

    Associated Press writer Pamela Hess contributed to this report.

 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

President Obama's Statement on the Memos

by: Visit article original @ t r u t h o u t | Transcript

    Following is President Obama's statement on the release of memos by the Office of Legal Counsel, as provided by the White House.

    The Department of Justice will today release certain memos issued by the Office of Legal Counsel between 2002 and 2005 as part of an ongoing court case. These memos speak to techniques that were used in the interrogation of terrorism suspects during that period, and their release is required by the rule of law.

    My judgment on the content of these memos is a matter of record. In one of my very first acts as President, I prohibited the use of these interrogation techniques by the United States because they undermine our moral authority and do not make us safer. Enlisting our values in the protection of our people makes us stronger and more secure. A democracy as resilient as ours must reject the false choice between our security and our ideals, and that is why these methods of interrogation are already a thing of the past.

    But that is not what compelled the release of these legal documents today. While I believe strongly in transparency and accountability, I also believe that in a dangerous world, the United States must sometimes carry out intelligence operations and protect information that is classified for purposes of national security. I have already fought for that principle in court and will do so again in the future. However, after consulting with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, and others, I believe that exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release.

    First, the interrogation techniques described in these memos have already been widely reported. Second, the previous Administration publicly acknowledged portions of the program – and some of the practices – associated with these memos. Third, I have already ended the techniques described in the memos through an Executive Order. Therefore, withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time. This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States.

    In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution. The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world. Their accomplishments are unsung and their names unknown, but because of their sacrifices, every single American is safer. We must protect their identities as vigilantly as they protect our security, and we must provide them with the confidence that they can do their jobs.

    Going forward, it is my strong belief that the United States has a solemn duty to vigorously maintain the classified nature of certain activities and information related to national security. This is an extraordinarily important responsibility of the presidency, and it is one that I will carry out assertively irrespective of any political concern. Consequently, the exceptional circumstances surrounding these memos should not be viewed as an erosion of the strong legal basis for maintaining the classified nature of secret activities. I will always do whatever is necessary to protect the national security of the United States.

    This is a time for reflection, not retribution. I respect the strong views and emotions that these issues evoke. We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past. Our national greatness is embedded in America's ability to right its course in concert with our core values, and to move forward with confidence. That is why we must resist the forces that divide us, and instead come together on behalf of our common future.

    The United States is a nation of laws. My Administration will always act in accordance with those laws, and with an unshakeable commitment to our ideals. That is why we have released these memos, and that is why we have taken steps to ensure that the actions described within them never take place again.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

This is so wrong it's evil.

This is so wrong it's evil. It is almost as evil as those that are now being patted in the back for doing it. Obama has just surrendered his right to judge or make any comments about morality - he is trying to fool us into thinking that justice cut in half is still justice and it most definitely is not. What do the devils that ordered and the devils that tortured have on Obama? Some rumors say that they have shown Obama consistently with operations that are truly horrendous that they can and will kill his entire family. Others say that the there are blackmail pictures keeping him in line for them. Others have claimed that they have threatened American cities if he goes for them. I think we just got bamboozled AGAIN!

ALL CRIMES WERE COMMITTED IN

ALL CRIMES WERE COMMITTED IN THE PAST! LORD HAVE MERCY, WHAT THE HELL DOES OBAMA MEAN WHEN HE SAY'S "NOTHING WILL BE GAINED BY SPENDING TIME AND ENERGY LAYING BLAME FOR THE PAST" IT'S CALLED - 'JUSTICE' - AND THE COMMITMENT TO THE RULE OF LAW!!! HOW CAN IT BE THAT SOMEONE WHO STUDIED LAW COULD MAKE SUCH AN IGNORANT STATEMENT!! HE'S ACTUALLY SAYING..."SINCE THESE CRIMES HAPPENED IN THE PAST IT WON'T DO ANY GOOD TO BRING THE CRIMINALS TO JUSTICE" CAN ANYONE TELL ME OTHERWISE? WHAT DOS THIS SAY TO THE REST OF THE WORLD? IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS AND WOE TO THOSE AMERICANS CAPTURED BY THE ONES THAT WE HAVE ILLEGALLY INVADED AND COMMITTED THE CRIMES OF MURDER AND TORTURE...OBAMA HAS MADE ANOTHER VERY BIG MISTAKE!!!

President Obama's first

President Obama's first mistake: letting the Bushistas off the hook!

we are no longer 'a nation

we are no longer 'a nation of laws' if we do not prosecute these people who have done this=there is nothing more to tell our children, & the drug cartels!

It's excellent that more

It's excellent that more information about these atrocities is now public. It's disgusting that Obama and Holder will not prosecute-vigorously-the criminals who tortured and mistreated mainly innocent people.

No one is above the

No one is above the law.Bush broke the law and should be held accountable.Obama should not turn his head as for as bush and Chaney goes.Yes these two have committed war crimes,and all sorts of crimes. \

Since when is it anyone's

Since when is it anyone's "duty" to torture prisoners?

Now we know that Holder

Now we know that Holder folded in his confirmation hearings. The rule of law is of no effect. The signal that this sends can be summed up by Judge Brandeis: β€œOur government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law.” --Justice Louis Brandeis, Olmstead v. United States, 1928 (dissenting opinion) I turned the radio off at the sound of our new president's voice after hearing the report of this on NPR. There will be no accountability and therefore no means of preventing this from happening again. Sad, sad day. Ike Abod.

This SHOULD BE A FORMAL

This SHOULD BE A FORMAL PRESIDENTIAL PARDON and not a "no, nevermind." These people ARE criminals in the eyes of the law no matter what "principles" Obama and the other bureaucrats would like to say apply. There are international laws condemning what they did that Bush and cronies just conveniently choose to abrogate and ignore. As a nation founded on the Rule of Laws, we cannot just arbitrarily enforce some of the laws on some of the people some of the time. Special Prosecutors needed to detail ALL of this and document names, places and times so that the world has a permanent record of this illegal activity.

Point well made. "Since

Point well made. "Since when is it anyone's "duty" to torture prisoners?" (Sagebrush)- It is every soldier's duty to disobey an illegal order is it not? The fundamental question becomes, does the oath sworn to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America taken by all officers and representatives of the government have any real veracity in practice or is it to be understood only as a quaint pretense which cannot in fact be adhered to in "the real world"? Never again, and again , and again...?

There was an attempted

There was an attempted citizen's arrest of George Bush when he visited Calgary March 17, because, like in this case, the government refused to follow their own law that says "credible suspects" of war crimes must be either barred from entry or arrested. On May 13, Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to come to the University of Calgary for a $500 a plate fundraiser. These war criminals must be made to answer for their actions. www.warcriminalsout.com

Gee, it's just too darn much

Gee, it's just too darn much trouble to prosecute torturers. Think of the criticism from the right-wing media and the gop! I wonder if I could get away with such egregious crimes if I said, "But some guy said it was ok!" And of course, instead of rejoicing that their ilk will get off scot-free with war crimes, right-wing fools are whining about how unsafe we now are on the one hand, and decrying Obama's 'fascism' on the other. This country keeps disgracing itself over and over. Ashamed to be American yet again.

Well, I guess its time to

Well, I guess its time to face facts... We are after all, apparently, A Nation of Men and Not of Laws for Everyone..., Because it seems that some People in America are above the Law... And..., The man I voted for, supported and placed my faith in..., is.., I fear.., just another, typical one or to term President trying to get along to keep going along instead of being 'that guy' who came along and CHANGED EVERYTHING into What America is supposed to be ...., one aspect of which is--- A NATION OF LAWS AND NOT OF MEN....

After Obama (ostensibly)

After Obama (ostensibly) promising to close Guantanamo, not much has changed there; now he has refused to close the prison at Bagram AFB, and has been silent on the other overseas black sites. And now he has blocked any repercussions for those responsible for authorizing the torture of the last 8 years. The message to the rest of the world could not be clearer: the U.S. has no intention of wiping the slate clean and thus again becoming a clean-handed world citizen. It is as though we would not have condemned Pinochet or Idi Amin. Al Qa'ida recuiters must be getting busy now.

Is this the change we voted

Is this the change we voted for? It's as if the Nazis had won, and that the Nuremberg Trials never were.

These are sad sad days in

These are sad sad days in America.

Bush needed a minstrel show.

Bush needed a minstrel show. Now he has it. Good going! Hey, while we're at it, why "waste energy" prosecuting ANY crimes? Why not "just move forward" and close all the prisons and release all the prisoners in federal detention? Could save billions and all the "wasted energy" needed to keep all those poor souls incarcerated. Oops! I forgot. It's not what you do; it's who you know. Rest assured, the next Republican president will take lawbreaking to the next step. How do you say "Hiel mein furher" in American? And I voted for these clowns!

The dangerous precedent has

The dangerous precedent has been allowed to stand. As a free society, we're done for.

I think we all owe

I think we all owe Adolf Eichmann an apology; after all, he was "only following orders," wasn't he?

He's just the clean-up guy

He's just the clean-up guy for the GOP, consistently making promises that'll draw the support of the Left and then breaking them to appease his GOP masters.

OK folks, what did you

OK folks, what did you expect? Our only hope is that people will finally realize that world justice will never be served by any one installed in the office of President of the United States, at least not until the ruling Kleptocracy is undone!

NOTE TO MODERATOR: I have

NOTE TO MODERATOR: I have reduced former submission to 300words in hopes you will consider publishing. Kind thanks! GG It is understandable that the President would offer to shield CIA operatives who were following orders from their superiors in Washington. He needs to have a loyal functioning clandestine service to keep the country safe. This will only prove to be an acceptable path however only if there is an intention to hold to account more senior officials within the Bush administration that conspired to move outside the law and who ordered this illegal activity. While they may have had noble intentions, the road to perdition is paved with such noble intentions. Torture is against the law. Anyone who knowingly participated in a conspiracy to violate the law even if he holds the office of the Presidency, needs to be held accountable if we are to be a nation of laws. American law on this particular subject is articulate and explicit and leaves no room for rationalization even for national security exemption. If someone commits a crime, whether it is robbery or assault or torture, do we tell the local sheriff that "nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past" ? This is not a statement attributable to a responsible and law abiding people. It is clearly a dodge and a faint from a confrontation with truth. While I deeply respect the difficulties attending this issue and the veritable minefield of possible outcomes that President Obama must negotiate with respect to it, I hope that he will lead us courageously in this and show us that the law is equally applicable to all ,up to and including our most senior elected officials lest we slide away even more deeply when he leaves office and another less scrupulous individual holds the office and believes the law is so elastic as to be irrelevant to individual ambition.

For me, this is the tipping

For me, this is the tipping point. Obama's actions in office already raised many questions β€” I hardly need to cite examples. Still, I continued to hope that he would bring real change. Now, it is clear that my vote last November was, once again, for the lesser of two evils. I might as well have stayed home.

Lawyer Obama should

Lawyer Obama should recognize the fact that he can't just waive the laws that are on the books, or ignore precedent. The Bush administration leaders made hash of the Constitution they had sworn to uphold. They managed to deflect attention to a few of the low-ranked personnel who actually administered the torture under orders from the top. Nurenberg established guidelines for culpability in "orders" situations. The secret directives finally opened establish a clear basis for prosecution. This isn't "looking backwards;" it's obeying the law, to which Obama and Holder and a lot of others took an oath of office. Obeying the law is part of our future -- it certainly isn't part of our past for at least eight years.

Change You Can Make-Believe

Change You Can Make-Believe In! Did you see Obama's new puppy? Isn't he cute? Clinton pulled this stuff for 8 years, and Democrats backed him up because he was one of ours. Wake up! There is only one party: the war party.

To all the well meaning

To all the well meaning Americans who voted for Obama, I extend my sympathies. Your two party system leaves no alternatives and its seems these days that it makes little difference if it is Democrat or Republican rule. Where do you go from here?

I saw it coming. I wonder

I saw it coming. I wonder what the administration threatened the Spanish with?

Shameful! Obama says

Shameful! Obama says torturers won't be prosecuted. So is there anyone who is guilty of torture? Nobody? We now have it that the CIA agents who did it were just following orders.(the old German genociders excuse, denied at Nuremberg) But what about members of the Bush Team--Gonzalez, Yoo, etc. who said it was OK to torture? Will no one be charged? Obama says he wants to be forward looking but this is a huge stain on who we are as a country. We want Cuba to free it's political prisoners but we still harbor torture criminals? Where's the justice?

I want to see the top

I want to see the top officials investigated and, if appropriate, prosecuted. However, there are other factors to consider re: the folks at the bottom. 1. People often have to rely upon the advice of experts in legal matters. For example, if your CPA says that a deduction is legal and you don't have the expertise to judge, yourself, but the IRS disagrees and wins in court, should the IRS prosecute you for tax evasion? It would be very different, for example, if you cajoled the CPA into giving that "advice." Check into the "estoppel" defense. It's not used a lot in the US, but it might be. (I am NOT an attorney!) As another example, if the US Supreme Court decided that the death penalty was, indeed, "cruel and unusual punishment," should every member of any jury that recommended the death penalty be prosecuted for murder? CONTINUED ...

interesting. A US

interesting. A US constitutional lawyer endorses the Nuremberg defense. I am suffering a deficit in hope for change....

Possibly the case can be

Possibly the case can be made that the grunts at ground level shouldn't take the fall for the misdeeds of the higher ups the way the little people in Abu Ghraib did. At the same time, anyone who thinks that these rationalizations were legitimate is too stupid to be entrusted with the well-being of our country. That means that from the very bottom on up each individual in the chain needs to be asked if they thought the legal memos were valid. If they did, they need to be fired. If they didn't, they need to be prosecuted unless they tried to prevent this disgusting display of sick sadism.

Nothing and no one will move

Nothing and no one will move forward until these crimes against humanity are OWNED by the criminals . . . torture is a crime. Period. The ticking-bomb scenario is a lie. Time for Justice. Past crimes will stay with us else.