Cheney, Others OK'd Harsh Interrogations

LARA JAKES JORDAN and PAMELA HESS | April 10, 2008 11:00 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

Show your support.
Buzz this article up.
Vice President Dick Cheney, speaks at the 50th anniversary celebration of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Thursday, April 10, 2008, in Washington. Bush administration officials from Vice President Dick Cheney on down signed off on using harsh interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists after asking the Justice Department to endorse their legality, The Associated Press has learned. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

WASHINGTON — Bush administration officials from Vice President Dick Cheney on down signed off on using harsh interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists after asking the Justice Department to endorse their legality, The Associated Press has learned.

The officials also took care to insulate President Bush from a series of meetings where CIA interrogation methods, including waterboarding, which simulates drowning, were discussed and ultimately approved.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the meetings described them Thursday to the AP to confirm details first reported by ABC News on Wednesday. The intelligence official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly discuss the issue.

Between 2002 and 2003, the Justice Department issued several memos from its Office of Legal Counsel that justified using the interrogation tactics, including ones that critics call torture.

"If you looked at the timing of the meetings and the memos you'd see a correlation," the former intelligence official said. Those who attended the dozens of meetings agreed that "there'd need to be a legal opinion on the legality of these tactics" before using them on al-Qaida detainees, the former official said.

The meetings were held in the White House Situation Room in the years immediately following the Sept. 11 attacks. Attending the sessions were Cheney, then-Bush aides Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.

The White House, Justice and State departments and the CIA refused comment Thursday, as did a spokesman for Tenet. A message for Ashcroft was not immediately returned.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., lambasted what he described as "yet another astonishing disclosure about the Bush administration and its use of torture."

"Who would have thought that in the United States of America in the 21st century, the top officials of the executive branch would routinely gather in the White House to approve torture?" Kennedy said in a statement. "Long after President Bush has left office, our country will continue to pay the price for his administration's renegade repudiation of the rule of law and fundamental human rights."

The American Civil Liberties Union called on Congress to investigate.

"With each new revelation, it is beginning to look like the torture operation was managed and directed out of the White House," ACLU legislative director Caroline Fredrickson said. "This is what we suspected all along."

The former intelligence official described Cheney and the top national security officials as deeply immersed in developing the CIA's interrogation program during months of discussions over which methods should be used and when.

At times, CIA officers would demonstrate some of the tactics, or at least detail how they worked, to make sure the small group of "principals" fully understood what the al-Qaida detainees would undergo. The principals eventually authorized physical abuse such as slaps and pushes, sleep deprivation, or waterboarding. This technique involves strapping a person down and pouring water over his cloth-covered face to create the sensation of drowning.

The small group then asked the Justice Department to examine whether using the interrogation methods would break domestic or international laws.

"No one at the agency wanted to operate under a notion of winks and nods and assumptions that everyone understood what was being talked about," said a second former senior intelligence official. "People wanted to be assured that everything that was conducted was understood and approved by the folks in the chain of command."

The Office of Legal Counsel issued at least two opinions on interrogation methods.

In one, dated Aug. 1, 2002, then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee defined torture as covering "only extreme acts" causing pain similar in intensity to that caused by death or organ failure. A second, dated March 14, 2003, justified using harsh tactics on detainees held overseas so long as military interrogators did not specifically intend to torture their captives.

Both legal opinions since have been withdrawn.

The second former senior intelligence official said rescinding the memos caused the CIA to seek even more detailed approvals for the interrogations.

The department issued another still-secret memo in October 2001 that, in part, sought to outline novel ways the military could be used domestically to defend the country in the face of an impending attack. The Justice Department so far has refused to release it, citing attorney-client privilege, and Attorney General Michael Mukasey declined to describe it Thursday at a Senate panel where Democrats characterized it as a "torture memo."

Not all of the principals who attended were fully comfortable with the White House meetings.

The ABC News report portrayed Ashcroft as troubled by the discussions, despite agreeing that the interrogations methods were legal.

"Why are we talking about this in the White House?" the network quoted Ashcroft as saying during one meeting. "History will not judge this kindly."

___

Associated Press writer Pete Yost contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

CIA: https://www.cia.gov/

Office of Legal Counsel: http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/


Comments
1412
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (16 pages total)

Any bill Cheney sponsors has to be bad! It can't be good when Obama says one thing then does another, he's done that a few times now...
Sen. Obama should be honest and tell Democrats that he voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill, which even his own supporters acknowledge contained billions of dollars in giveaways to the oil industry. We don't need another politician to talk about standing up to the oil industry,and then voting alongside them.
If it is a Cheney bill you know it's bad and Yet Obama voted for it! we need a fighter like Hillary Clinton who will actually stand up for us and fight these companies." Not someone like Obama who will say anything to get elected, like his NAFTA comment to Canadian Ambassador it was all for show! or just campaign rhetoric...Sort of like we found out through people who testified in Rezko trial said Obama's ethics bill was all for show! He says he is for the people then goes for the big companies and businessmen Sounds like he is playing the voters!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:26 AM on 04/13/2008

Who's taking PAC contributions again? Oh Yeah, Hillary, that champion of corporate rights.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 PM on 04/14/2008

Is there any truth to a memo that Ralph Nader read about comments coming from a Senator in Vermont in his response to his constituents demanding articles of impeachment against Cheney and Bush saying that if this was done a strike would be made against Iran and marshal law would be declared, thus subverting the 2008 election.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 PM on 04/11/2008

Shouldn't we concern ourselves more with those that would carry out such orders...if they were to occur?
They bushcheney do not continue without support.., knock out the support(LOL)...and he's gone....

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 04/12/2008

Bush doesn't need anything to happen to call marshal law and put his illegal private Blackwater conservation mercenary in charge of controlling Americans. Bush has already used Blackwate in New Orleans which showed they didn't care or abide by our constitution and rights when demanding the citizens to listen and obey they every demand.
Bush has taken the right to do as he d... well please and pays no attention to our constitution , bill or rights or any law which he wishes not of obey.
Bush has spy on Americans illegally with no authority , he has been involved in treason of outing a covert CIA agent , lying to destroy Iraq for their resources and doesn't give a d... how many of our soldiers are killed or wounded do it or the mass killing our the Iraqi citizens.
Bush has replaced all of our government agencies with his puppet personal and also any military leader which gives their oppinion on running our military , which doesn't keep to his policies of waging war on Iraq , Iran or Syria.
Bush has shown if anyone stands up and says any thing against his corruption he is quickly taken care of.
Bush runs our country with dictatorial powers & refuses to obey our constitution , bill of rights , or laws which give the congress and senate a say in running our government.
Bush has set in place all step necessary to take over our country by marshal law....

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:01 AM on 04/12/2008

Bush is not the problem...those that backed and supported entitlement to initial nomination, and continue support of his stance, are the problem; we should focus on those culprits...but then...even more, we'd need to focus on ourselves....

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:28 PM on 04/12/2008

And THAT's actually a picture of him smiling!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:24 PM on 04/11/2008

No, it is more than a picture of him smiling, he is also attempting to talk out of both sides of his mouth.
In laymans terms: The master of double speak.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:06 AM on 04/12/2008

Mr. Mutual Disdain: Are you recieving a weekly paycheck from the Bush administration?? You could almost apply for the job of press sec. You have all the talking points down pat. You seem so rational that its scarey. You have bought into the Neo-cons story full tilt. Anything goes in this scenario as long as you are safe from the "terrorists". Give up all your freedoms and the hell with the constitution. I feel very sorry for you and your ilk.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 PM on 04/11/2008

Yes, I get paid thousands of dollars a day to post messages that 20 people read. I seam rational because I am rationalizing. I view the events, I read information from the experts, I investigate the issue logically, and I make my decision.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:29 PM on 04/11/2008

seem.. sorry for the typo... i am once again in a rush

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:33 PM on 04/11/2008

Does cheyney look more and more, like one of those hideous pumpkin face carvings you make with the kids on halloween, especially around the mouth and eyes, or is just my imagination.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:26 PM on 04/11/2008

the time has come for everybody to stop "talking" about the crimes of this admiistraton and start some action.'

the world is watching us.

none of us will be able to hold our heads up in the world if action is not forced on this democratically controlled congress.

close to 1500 posts amounts to nothing, it's all just vented hot air.

either put up or shut up if you feel as outraged as you sound.

they count on you venting your frustration in the ether then convincing yourself that you actually "did something"

everyone on this site knows, in their heart, what needs to happen to this bunch

what amazes me is that no one want to be the vehicle to make it happen,.

just what does that say about us?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:58 PM on 04/11/2008

"We must be the change we wish to see in the world." -- Dalai Lama

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:49 PM on 04/11/2008

Not much!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:47 PM on 04/11/2008

It says that American ultra-patriotism takes precedent over all moral and ethical values.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 04/11/2008

dotmafia,
And the best thing about that is in order to prove your patriotism all's you need is a plastic flag in your lapel .

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:26 PM on 04/11/2008

.

When the MSMBS tells us that it was Cheney and "OTHERS" they're telling a half truth.

One of the "OTHERS" not mentioned can be found on this memo...

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB127/02.02.07.pdf

.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 04/11/2008

Thanks to all of those who took the time to engage me in conversation. I have to go now, but if anyone would like to take up my position feel free.

Good night.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 04/11/2008

A pleasure.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:53 PM on 04/11/2008

Bush and Cheney will not be impeached and they will suffer no repercussions after leaving office because they are Americans leading their country in a time of so-called "war".

Simply put, American ultra-patriotism will save them.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 04/11/2008

Besides.... there is no extradition treaty with Paraguay.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 PM on 04/11/2008

Bush I forgave Ronald Reagan for Iran/Contra; Clinton forgave Bush 41; Bush 43 forgave Clinton; Ford forgave Nixon, and so on. It's all for show.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:08 PM on 04/11/2008

The sad thing is that you're right.

It is just a show for the great unwashed.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:19 PM on 04/11/2008

There should be no harsh interrogations like water boarding, or comparable methods such as, making them eat their apple pie without ice cream, serving them wine a less than room temperature, making them to watch cable TV rather than DISH TV. Such draconian methods as those listed above, should not be allowed in a civilized society. The least we could do is give captured terrorists minimum wage for the time they are detained, and a low interest loan with a large cash advance tohelp them buy a business when they get out.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:46 PM on 04/11/2008

No, we should adopt our enemies' tactics and sink to their level. Forget about interrogations -off with their heads! Why didn't the USA think of this in WWII? Haliburton and Blackwater could have made a fortune operating American concentration camps for German enemy "suspects".

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:41 PM on 04/11/2008

"sink to their level"? How arrogant! I am one of those people who is so arrogant as to think that we are better than others. I think all people should be
treated the same, EXACTLY THE SAME. If people who want to murder us all, take prisoners, I don't think we are
better than them, I think we should treat the prisoners we take EXACTLY THE SAME as they treat the prisoners they
take. If they stay with name rank and serial number, we stay with that. If they cut off heads, then because we are all
equals, we simply give equal treatment to them. We are not better than them, we are all equals, and we should treat
them in an EXACTLY equal way.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:18 PM on 04/11/2008

missed the point... we WON WW2 without being "equal" to the Nazis. Couldn't we do that again? (with a competent CiC).

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:57 PM on 04/16/2008

Has anybody ever noticed Cheney's body language at all when he's answering questions? I mean, has everyone completely overlooked this?

He looks down, avoiding direct eye contact, and he always shifts uncomfortably in his seat.

These are classic tell-tale signs of someone who is lying or distorting facts. And he has done this time and time again.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:37 PM on 04/11/2008

Speaking if body language, Cheney's raised left upper lip tells it all.
It is a reality that invading Iraq had been on the Cheney/Rumsfeld calendar since 1997 when it became a major platform in the founding of their New American Century. In other words, if 9/11 had not occurred, another excuse would have been devised.

I have my own Axis of Evil: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld. Bush for being so being used and Cheney and Rumsfeld for their consummate lying and disinterest for the American public.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 PM on 04/11/2008

Do you remember Bush's blinking period? It was during the run up to the war in Iraq. Cheney is a big liar also. Cheney is lying, "if you will," to quote him. I have read every statement he has made and every thing he wrote about why Saddam Hussein was not taken out in the Gulf War. Then comparing what he said in the run up and aftermath of the invasion of Iraq. He absolutely knew that there would be an insurgency, sectarian strife and a civil war. When Lynn Cheney says: "We don't use torture!" I just laugh. Cheney has been saying that it is a "no brainer." Alan Dershowitz proposed that "torture warrants" be issued by the President. Hmmm... do you think Cheney consulted with Cheney? The extraordinary extradition program began in 1997, according to Amnesty International. Is this why the Democrats are so quite about torture. What does Bill Clinton have to hide? The renditions were outsourced to Syria and Egypt. Syria gives good torture. Egypt gets rid of the suspect permanently.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:05 PM on 04/11/2008

"Cheney consulted with Dershowitz" not "Cheney". Sorry.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:21 PM on 04/11/2008

yeah body language, like his lips moving. Any time Cheney's lips are moving it means he's lying!!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:58 PM on 04/11/2008

I'm struck by the degree of effort put into insulating themselves from future problems as a result of their actions when they failed to put that effort into planning for the result of their war.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:34 PM on 04/11/2008

The purpose of the war is to control the region and its oil and gas. From that stand point, the war is a success already. The British colonial powers used the "divide and rule" principle. They have divided the people in Iraq and the now within U.S. itself.

Fluid groups of individuals are turned into immutable ethnic units to be played upon when hopelessness and pessimism is deep and when the right opportunity presents itself. A simmering pot is ready to boil over at a desired moment when the right strings are pulled, or hot buttons pushed. Both sides of the conflict are armed. The British know very well that individuals and groups can be impelled into behaving in a predictable manner, contrary to the real interests of their country.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:36 PM on 04/11/2008

I think they got precisely what they wanted from the war -- richer.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:28 PM on 04/11/2008

Maybe he should have a dose of his own medicine to see if it's really torture or not. What a creep.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:34 PM on 04/11/2008