Have you read this: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/082409/olcremand/2004olc97.pdf
I’m still trying to picture a walling collar. I expect it has hand grips so the torturer can better grasp the subject and bash his head into the wall. It’s not the people that actually conducted these “interrogations” that should be indicted, it’s the people that authorized them. We all know who they are.
Is it possible to find some condensed version of the document, or selected snippets?
Why not both? “Following orders” is a bad excuse in these matters.
I think this was established at Nuremberg.
Basically, it sums up interrogation methods performed by the CIA on High Value Detainees (HVD). They could be subject to being stripped nude for long durations, sleep deprivation, slapping, loud noises, and “walling” to get the HVD to comply with the interrogators and/or answer their questions.
Walling: “…consists of slamming a person against a wall. The wall is false, and the person’s head and neck are supported to prevent whiplash.” (from howstuffworks.com)
Are they interrogators really going to be indicted for torture? I’ve seen stuff in the news but having been paying attention. It’s going to be really difficult to violate statute 2340 (torture) for walling or the other techniques described in this memo.
I agree with OP thoguh, if you indict the interrogators, for god’s sake go up the chain to the heart of the problem.
bring charges against them all. The people that ordered the torture, and the people unethical enough to comply and blow the whistle. The president needs to be set that if you’re ordered to break the law complying with that order is a crime.
blast the incomprehensibly short edit window.
That should read:
bring charges against them all. The people that ordered the torture, and the people unethical enough to comply and not blow the whistle. The president needs to be set that if you’re ordered to break the law complying with that order is a crime.
Precedent! Precedent!
<slams Tao’s head into a wall>
(I mainly replied because I read "The president needs to be " before my brain slammed into the alternate reading of it, tripped hard, flailed wildly, and then faceplanted with a thud that shattered windows three blocks away. And then you didn’t fix it in the corrected post!)
Do you mean precedent?
ETA: Doh. begbert2 got there first 
Oh, and, uh. I also think that the both the persons who carried out the torture and the people who ordered it should be indicted. I also think there’s not a chance in purgatory that the latter group will be.
Don’t wall me bro!
(I knew it looked it wrong but I wasn’t sure why)
Glenn Greenwald gives a good synopsis.
Here is my problem with all this. The “interrogators” were told that what they were doing is legal, and that the detainees had real information on future terrorism, and that they were for-sure bad guys, and that the information they and others had gathered was making a difference.
Yeah they were dicks for going along, but the blame starts with the folks in charge at the White House: Bush, Chaney, Yoo, and Gonzales. They should investigate from the bottom up, but prosecute from the top down.
Right. It’s pretty ironic that the DOJ says these are techniques that are legal, and now the DOJ is prosecuting people for committing those acts.
I don’t think the DOJ is going to prosecute anyone for any technique written in a “memo” because they might have been legal when written; They will prosecute low level people for going beyond the memo. ie, shooting a gun to fake a death, ect.
That’s the fear: that they’re going to crack down on a bunch of Lynddie Englands while letting the lawyers and top administration officials off the hook.
I wonder if we’re going to hear about the alleged success stories that Cheney insisted would be revealed by the memos. If they’re in there, they seem to have been redacted.
That’s what happens when the White House uses the Justice Department as its legal enabler instead of, I don’t know, letting the Justice Department work.
I haven’t read the actual torture memos, but I read the summaries of interrogations a few months and I’ve read articles summarizing what has been decided and disclosed in the last few days. It seems to me that Holder is aware it would be unfair to only go after the interrogators here. Good for him for actually doing his job. It’s about fucking time this got the investigation it deserves.
You are correct that (probably) no one will get prosecuted for doing something ok’d in a DOJ memo. I forget the legal term but the legal eagles here have said in the past (in other threads) that an appeal to authority is a positive defense (not sure I used the right term there). Basically if you ask a police officer if you can skateboard in a park and they say sure then arrest you for skateboarding in the park you have a pretty good defense to avoid prosecution.
Thing is methods of torture were used which were not ok’d by the DOJ. So, if you skateboard in the park and get arrested for smoking a joint you have no good defense.
Also, while likely not going to be put into effect here, the Nuremberg trials established that doing something because your boss told you to is not a defense. At some point some things are too heinous and your humanity should assert itself and you should refuse the order…no matter the consequences to you.
I see Cheney hasn’t decided whether he’ll cooperate with the investigation. I’d love to see him and they lawyers I believe they instructed to define torture all be prosecuted.