FBI Weren't the Only Ones Objecting to Torture in 2002 -- So Did the Army, Marines & Air Force
There were already serious objections to the use of torture when the Bush administration made it legal in 2002 -- FBI chief Robert Mueller refused to let his agents participate in the CIA's "coercive interrogations" in June of that year, well before the Bybee memo made them legal on August 1.
But it's not like the FBI was alone in expressing those concerns. On October 1, the commander in charge of detainee interrogation at Guantanamo Bay wrote a memo requesting authority to use "aggressive interrogations techniques" that were similar to those outlined in the Bybee memo. It reached the desk of Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Joint Staff solicited opinions before making a decision. Here's what came back to them in November 2002 (PDF):
Air Force: Had "serious concerns regarding the legality of many of the proposed techniques...Some of these techniques could be construed as 'torture' as that crime is defined by 18 U.S.C 2340." Further, they were concerned that "implementation of these techniques could preclude the ability to prosecute the individuals interrogated," because "Level III techniques will almost certainly result in any statements obtained being declared as coerced and involuntary, and therefore inadmissible....Additionally, the techniques described may be subject to challenge as failing to meet the requirements outlined in military order to treat detainees humanely and to provide them with adequate food, water, shelter and medical treatment." They called for an in-depth legal review.
Criminal Investigative Task Force (CITM): Chief Legal Advisor to the CITF at Gitmo, Maj Sam W. McCahon, writes "Both the utility and the legality of applying certain techniques identified in the memorandum listed above are, in my opinion, questionable. Any policy decision to use the Tier III techniques, or any techniques inconsistent with the analysis herein, will be contrary to my recommendation. The aggressive techniques should not occur at GTMO where both CITF and the intelligence community are conducting interviews and interrogations." He calls for further review and concludes by saying "I cannot advocate any action, interrogation or otherwise, that is predicated upon the principal that all is well if the ends justify the means and others are not aware of how we conduct our business."
Army: The Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans writes: "As set forth in the enclosed memoranda, the Army interposes significant legal, policy and practical concerns regarding most of the Category II and all of the Category III techniques proposed." They recommend "a comprehensive legal review of this proposal in its entirety by the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice."
Navy: recommends that "more detailed interagency legal and political review be conducted on proposed techniques."
Marine Corp: expressed strong reservations, since "several of the Category II and III techniques arguably violate federal law, and would expose our service members to possible prosecution." Called for further review.
Legal adviser to the Joint Chiefs, Jane Dalton, commenced the review that was requested by the military services. But before it was concluded, Myers put a stop to it -- at the request of Jim Haynes, the Department of Defense General Counsel, who was told by Rumsfeld that things were "taking too long." Over the objections of the Army, the Navy, the Marines, the Air Force and the Criminal Investigation Task Force, Haynes recommended that the "aggressive technique" be approved without further investigation. He testified that Wolfowitz, Feith and Myers concurred.
On December 2, 2002 Rumsfeld approved Haynes' recommendation with the famous comment "I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?"
One of the conclusions of the Senate Armed Services Committee report is that Myers screwed up:
Conclusion 11: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers's decision to cut short the legal and policy review of the October 11,2002 GTMO request initiated by his Legal Counsel, then-Captain Jane Dalton, undermined the military's review process. Subsequent conclusions reached by Chairman Myers and Captain Dalton regarding the legality of interrogation techniques in the request followed a grossly deficient review and were at odds with conclusions previously reached by the Anny, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Criminal Investigative Task Force.
They also conclude that "Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques for use at Guantanamo Bay was a direct cause of detainee abuse there. Secretary Rumsfeld's December 2,2002 approval of Mr. Haynes's recommendation that most of the techniques contained in GTMO's October 11, 2002 request be authorized, influenced and contributed to the use of abusive techniques, including military working dogs, forced nudity, and stress positions, in Afghanistan and Iraq."
Objections to torture aren't the exclusive terrain, as Bill Kristol likes to pretend, of "President Obama" and his "leftist lawyers" looking back on a "bright, sunny safe day in April" with "preening self-righteousness" and forgetting how "dark and painful" that chapter in our history was.
When Donald Rumsfeld approved "enhanced interrogation techniques" for Guantanamo Bay in 2002, he did so in defiance of the recommendations of the Army, the Navy, the Marines, the Air Force and the Criminal Investigation Task Force.
Loading comments…
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
Just like to remind everyone of the School of the Americas at Fort Benning Georgia, where all
those Latin American officers were taught among otherthings the techniques of torture. There
were also many advisors to these countries, and while they might not have participated in the
torture, they were busily observing and advising. Most of the military was not involved in this.
As for the CIA, they have been practing "extraordinary renditions" for some time, by sending
people to states which do torture, and have been letting someone else do the dirty work.
Lastly, the CIA was providing lists of "leftists" to Latin American countries, many of who were
tortured and killed.
The six lawyers who danced around the Geneva Convention should spent long periods of time in a dark box with a snake. They will be told this snake may be a pit viper and the only question left unanswered is "when", not "if". Let them wonder... is it or is it not deadly.
The rest of these a$$ holes need to appear before the World Court at the Hague to answer for this willful circumvention of the rule of law and their total disdain for the documents this country entered into and signed off on..
If we are a Republic, we need to act like one. That was what the Founding Fathers envisioned.
Jane: thanks for bringing this important aspect of the torture story to light. This is yet another example of how bloggers outshine the MSM!
Rumsfeld is what the military refers to as a "blue falcon".
So, if your own people are telling you what you are trying to do is illegal and refuse to participate, you just bring in external guys, i.e. contractors, who have no such qualms and won't cause you any problems because they are private and work for a profit.
That's a way of working often used in large corporations. If the people in the company resist your plans for change, you just bring in new guys, who depend only on you and report only to you, and whose task is to get things done your way, work around resistance and rules and plant 'evidence' that you need to justify your way of acting.
Probably not a coincidence that all, government and corporations, work with the same playbook.
However, kudos to the FBI, the Marines, Navy and Air Force.
There was a TV show called JAG that was about Navy lawyers that started to have shows on Afghanistan and the war, it was a successful show that had been on for awhile, then it was off the air suddenly and I wondered if it had to do with the show not wanting to go down the road saying torture was justified. It seemed suspicious at the time that it got dropped...and Catherine Bell was on it so it was fun to watch. Anyone know anything about why it went of the air? I think you can see reruns on cable networks but no new shows.
The politicos need to listen to the people in uniform every once in a while.
Those same uniformed people will be the ones subject to the retaliation
brought on by our shameful conduct.
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME TODAY
The Commander of the DOD Criminal Investigation Task Force, after seeing the plans for those techniques, expressly prohibited their agents from participating in any of the interrogations. I think that Commander also reported directly to Haynes and either the Army or the Navy law enforcement types.
Just think about how much misery this country would have been spared if impeachment had not been taken off the table. Even if it had not actually happened, a congressional investigation might very well have prevented us from coming to this sad state of affairs. Instead the Bush team was given a pass to do whatever they damn well pleased.
I may never forgive Pelosi and Reid for this.
Reid wasn't responsible for that. It was Pelosi alone.
Agreed. Pelosi is a horrendous hypocrite. She can protest that 'til the cows come home, but a hypocrite she will remain.
The torture started in 2002.
The Democrats didn't have majority until 2007.
What could have been accomplished?
John McCain in the WH.
By now it's pretty clear that Bush and Cheney's intentions were to destroy the U.S. They messed up everything, they tortured even though they knew it was illegal, they declared a war they knew was illegal, they took away our civil liberties, wiped their ass with the constitution, destroyed the country's reputation abroad, set up secret death squads, assisted bankers in stealing from the treasury and destroyed the national and world economies, and much much more. The signs of treason are clear. Bush, Cheney and their advisers should be tried for treason, murder, and theft, not just torture.
Doesn't make it illegal.
? ? Being against the law doesn't make it illegal? Oh, I see, some lawyers obfiscated. Legality, ethics, and morality must follow therefrom.
It is legal, anything is, if your country is the USA. It's simply unimaginable that an American administration would be prosecuted for war crimes. The evidence of such crimes are overwhelming yet the congress, the pundits and the white house keep talking around it. It will never happen because it is not allowed to. Everyone is equal under the law, even international law, but some are more equal than others (animals are not allowed to sleep in beds 'with sheets').
After World War 2, the U.S. charged a Japanese officer with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. He was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor. In 2002, the US military apparently thought that it was still a crime. I bet they were right.
Then is shoplifting at Walmart legal as long as the thief's lawyer refers to it as an "Enhanced Price-Rollback Technique?"
LOL. Good one.
The Holocaust was legal under German law yet still considered a crime against humanity; what's your point?
I believe that the President is waiting for overwhelming public demand so that he can say that he hands are tied. It isn't the leadership I voted for but it is right that the DoJ handle the process rather then the International Criminal Court. Can we still claim the moral high ground, even if we no longer torture, if we don't clean out our own backyard but make the rest of the world do it for us. That would be acting like a Banana Republic, well that and torturing in the first place.
It's exactly the leadership I voted for-one that returns us to being a nation of laws. And I believe that he he indeed waiting for widespread public support-without it any investigation would go nowhere, and that is the only way the MSM will report on any of it. Otherwise any investigation will never come close to real authors of the crimes who are still very much in the picture.
I take issue with the authors claim that a 2002 Bush memo made torture legal. It didn't because it couldn't. It may have made it policy but that in no manner makes it legal.
As much as I think that the policy makers need to pay for their illegal actions I concur with the President that congress needs to focus on more important issues. We may take years to sort this out and while congress multi tasks all the time they are easily distracted. Especially unfortunately the Democrats.
Lets fix what is broken and then as we stand on stable ground we can probe the darkness of the Bush years. There is so much to fix with the economy and that does require a reflective process that I doubt we could can do everything at once. Fixing the broken moral compass that led to torture is easily and quickly fixed. It has been done.
It is called setting priorities. We have a long line of broken things to focus on fixing. Hopefully soon we will be in a position to address the no less important but certainly less critical elements.
I think it's pretty sad that the republican's and the Bush administration chastised anyone that disagreed with them. The most worst moment that comes to mind is the way Rumsfield treated and talked about our troops. Torture was bad enough but where did they get off with sending our troops into war without making sure they the equipment to fight the war properly. It really makes my blood boil when they were called on the carpet for it, we were called unpatriotic. This comes from leaders that avoided there time in the Viet Nam war. Oh that's right if there is one thing I learned out of this whole thing is if you was in the Bush administration you were above the law and when the law was inconvenient then you re wrote it to suit your needs.
"Chastised"? That's putting it mildly. The Bush team DESTROYED anyone that disagreed with them, professional, personally and sometimes literally. And I agree with you on Rumsfeld-just reading about his behavior in the Bush administration turns my stomach.
So in essence this was more of a dictatorship than a democracy. B/C/R road roughshod over everything and everyone. Talk about a banana republic. Their total disregard for others' opinions and our constitution makes me sick.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
