The Yglesias Torture Question

Matthew Yglesias asks if conservatives understand torture. Judging by comments from my blog they haven't bothered to read the memos. I wrote the post "Why We Should Care About Torture." A commenter named James argued deprivation is not torture. A memo by Steven Bradbury of the Office of Legal Council argued sleep deprivation would not inflict pain. Bradbury cited Prof. James Horne's book "Why We Sleep: The Functions of Sleep in Humans and Other Mammals." The memo admits the paticipants of Horne's sleep experiments were "free to move about and engage in normal activities." Horne's experiments were being used as a defensive cover for torture. The memos admits "important differences" between Horne's study and CIA interrogations.

We understand from OMS, and from our review of the literature on the physiology of sleep, that even very extended sleep deprivation does not cause physical pain, let alone severe. physical pain." "The longest studies of sleep deprivation in humans, .. [involved) volunteers [who were deprived of sleep for g to 11 days" .. Surprisingly, tittle seemed to go wrong with the subjects physically. The main effects lay with sleepiness and impaired brain functioning, but even these were no great cause for concern." James Horne, "Why We Sleep: The Functions of Sleep in Humans and Other Mammals" 23-24 (1988) ("Why We Sleep") (footnote omitted).. We note that there are important differences between steep deprivation as an interrogation technique used by the CIA and the controlled experiments documented in the literature. The subjects of the experiments were free to move about and engage in normal activities and often led a "tranquil existence" with "plenty of time for relaxation," See iii. at 24,

Blogger Hizroy contacted Horne. The Professor remarks extended sleep deprivation during interrogation "possible trauma, even blood loss." Horne expresses doubt that sleep deprivation could produce useful information from detainees.

With additional stresses as in ‘coercive techniques’, the situation for the sleep deprived victim becomes deplorable, as the mind and brain under these circumstances trigger the body’s defences to create a physiological ‘alarm reaction’ whereby, for example, various stress coping hormones are mobilised and prepare the body for possible trauma, even blood loss. I emphasise that this alarm reaction is not present under ‘pure sleep loss’ as I have just described. Prolonged stress with sleep deprivation will lead to a physiological exhaustion of the body’s defence mechanisms, physical collapse, and with the potential for various ensuing illnesses. We don’t know at what point this latter phase would be reached with ‘coercive techniques’, but to claim that 180 hours is safe in these respects, is nonsense. Moreover, whereas physical pain may not be particularly apparent even at this stage, the mental pain would be all too evident, and arguably worse than physical pain.

Even if one was to be pragmatic and claim that this form of sleep deprivation produced ‘desired results’, I would doubt whether the state of mind would be able to produce credible information, unaffected by delusion, fantasy or suggestibility.

Conservatives are willfully ignorant about the true implications of torture. Conservatives spents years denying the United States tortures. Now they say torture produces good intelligences. Even Dick Cheney is having problems citing instances where torture produced valuable intelligence. The only argument conservatives have left is an "eye-for-an-eye" justice.

White House Backtracking on Torture Prosecution

President Barack Obama has left the door open to prosecution of Bush administration lawyers involved in making torture policy.

"With respect to those who formulated those legal decisions, I would say that that is going to be more of a decision for the Attorney General within the parameters of various laws, and I don't want to prejudge that. I think that there are a host of very complicated issues involved there."

Asked about his opinion of a congressional investigation into the matter, Obama refrained from taking a position -- but maintained that such an investigation should be bipartisan if it happens. "As a general deal, I think that we should be looking forward and not backwards. I do worry about this getting so politicized that we cannot function effectively, and it hampers our ability to carry out critical national security operations."

That is different than Rahn Emanuel's previous statement.

Asked Sunday on ABC's "This Week" about the fate of those officials, Emanuel said the president believes they "should not be prosecuted either and that's not the place that we go."

The release of the memos was going to create pressure on Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to prosecute. Obama was asked in the Oval Office if Bush lawyers could be prosecuted. "I don’t want to prejudge that," Obama answered.

Obama repeatly stressed C.I.A. operatives will not be prosecuted. The President went to the Langley headquarters to personally deliver that message.

The White House press corp is curious about why the Obama administration backtracked on previous statements about criminal prosecutions against Bush officials. Press Sec. Robert Gibbs does his best to spin.



Kevin Drum makes a strong argument that Office of Legal Counsel attorney can not be prosecuted without charges leading to George W. Bush. Drum sees Obama eventually ruling prosecution is impossible. My take is this is take on momentum of it's own. Bush supporters are fewer than the people that dislkie him. That doesn't mean Bush, Dick Cheney, or Donald Rumsfeld will be prosecuted. George Tenet is another story. Some people were born to fall on the sword.

Gitmo to Close

Remember this gem from Glenn Reynolds yesterday.

OBAMA IS BACKTRACKING ON CLOSING GUANTANAMO BAY any time soon. Apparently he’s concluded that it’s not as easy as it sounded back during the campaign.

The Associated Press reports President-elect Barack Obama will close Guantanamo Bay the first week of his administration. Obama will use an executive order to issue the closing of the detainee facility.

My take continues to be Obama is committed to closing Guantanamo Bay. Obama sees Gitmo as a political and civil liberties disaster. Sec. of Defense Robert Gates lobbied to close Gitmo since 2007. Gates has a President-elect that will allow him to implement his policy.

Glenn Greenwald is upset Obama isn't closing Guantanamo Bay the first day of the administration.

As Talk Left's Jeralyn Merritt documents, Obama today rather clearly stated that he will not close Guantanamo in the first 100 days of his presidency. He recited the standard Jack Goldsmith/Brookings Institution condescending excuse that closing Guantanamo is "more difficult than people realize." Specifically, Obama argued, we cannot release detainees whom we're unable to convict in a court of law because the evidence against them is "tainted" as a result of our having tortured them, and therefore need some new system -- most likely a so-called new "national security court" -- that "relaxes" due process safeguards so that we can continue to imprison people indefinitely even though we're unable to obtain an actual conviction in an actual court of law.

There is no question many innocent men were sold to the CIA by Afghan tribal lords and Pakistani officials. Corrupt men sold other men to the CIA for quick cash. That doesn't mean Gitmo doesn't have dangerous terrorists. Obama can't release these men. Prosecution is difficult because of confessions given under torture. Greenwald too easy dismisses the dilemma facing Obama.

Greenwald knows Obama appointed Dawn Johnsen to the Office of Legal Counsel. Greenwald called the appointment "may be Obama's best yet." Johnsen wrote a Slate op-ed condemning the OLC authorizing the White House to use torture in interrogations.

I want to second Dahlia's frustration with those who don't see the newly released Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) torture memo as a big deal. Where is the outrage, the public outcry?! The shockingly flawed content of this memo, the deficient processes that led to its issuance, the horrific acts it encouraged, the fact that it was kept secret for years and that the Bush administration continues to withhold other memos like it--all demand our outrage.

Obama is surrounding himself with people against torture. What Greenwald and Jeralyn Merritt want Obama to be confrontational. That is not Obama's style. Obama will never be John Conyers or Howard Dean. Obama will use popularism to pass his agenda. That is how he got elected. That is how he will govern and it will drive progressives crazy.

Jack Goldsmith

Jack Goldsmith is a former attorney of the Office of Legal Council. He nearly resigned because of a top secret surveillance program. Former Justice Department official and FBI Director Robert Mueller were prepared to resign, with him, because of the same program. All three men were in the hospital room attempting to stop Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card from making John Ashcroft sign authorization to a secret program.

Goldsmith eventually resigned after overruling a John Yoo torture opinion.

Goldsmith was concerned, however, that the White House might overrule him. So he made a strategic decision: on the same day that he withdrew the opinion, he submitted his resignation, effectively forcing the administration to choose between accepting his decision and letting him leave quietly, or rejecting it and turning his resignation into a big news story. “If the story had come out that the U.S. government decided to stick by the controversial opinions that led the head of the Office of Legal Counsel to resign, that would have looked bad,” Goldsmith told me. “The timing was designed to ensure that the decision stuck.”

The White House drafted these opinions to justify their consolidation of presidential power. The NSA was not allowed to view legal opinions that involved their agency. The affect was the Bush administration weakened executive power for future generations.

In retrospect, Goldsmith told me, Bush “could have achieved all that he wanted to achieve, and put it on a firmer foundation, if he had been willing to reach out to other institutions of government.” Instead, Goldsmith said, he weakened the presidency he was so determined to strengthen. “I don’t think any president in the near future can have the same attitude toward executive power, because the other institutions of government won’t allow it,” he said softly. “The Bush administration has borrowed its power against future presidents.”

What is surprising about the legal fights within the administration is how well John Ashcroft comes off. He hated Yoo's opinions and thought tribunals were a bad idea. It's scary when conservative laywers feel that the Bushies are extreme. These people aren't tree-hugging hippies. They are hardcore Republican. Even they were shaking their heads and saying "WTF."

Hat tip to Mustang Bobby.