War On Terror Secret US Endorsement of Severe Interrogations
Reports of unacceptable interrogation techniques led to a shake up in policy and staff at the Justice Department in 2004. After Alberto Gonzales' arrival, the public started hearing things had changed, but new reports claim that things remained the same -- or worsened.
If emerging reports are true, Alberto Gonzales' Justice Department issued interrogation instructions to the CIA quite different than the ones it publicly espoused.
When the Justice Department publicly declared torture abhorrent in a legal opinion in December 2004, the Bush administration appeared to have abandoned its assertion of nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.
But soon after Alberto R. Gonzaless arrival as attorney general in February 2005, the Justice Department issued another opinion, this one in secret. It was a very different document, according to officials briefed on it, an expansive endorsement of the harshest interrogation techniques ever used by the Central Intelligence Agency.
The new opinion, the officials said, for the first time provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.
Mr. Gonzales approved the legal memorandum on combined effects over the objections of James B. Comey, the deputy attorney general, who was leaving his job after bruising clashes with the White House. Disagreeing with what he viewed as the opinions overreaching legal reasoning, Mr. Comey told colleagues at the department that they would all be ashamed when the world eventually learned of it.
Later that year, as Congress moved toward outlawing cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, the Justice Department issued another secret opinion, one most lawmakers did not know existed, current and former officials said. The Justice Department document declared that none of the C.I.A. interrogation methods violated that standard.
The classified opinions, never previously disclosed, are a hidden legacy of President Bushs second term and Mr. Gonzaless tenure at the Justice Department, where he moved quickly to align it with the White House after a 2004 rebellion by staff lawyers that had thrown policies on surveillance and detention into turmoil.
Congress and the Supreme Court have intervened repeatedly in the last two years to impose limits on interrogations, and the administration has responded as a policy matter by dropping the most extreme techniques. But the 2005 Justice Department opinions remain in effect, and their legal conclusions have been confirmed by several more recent memorandums, officials said. They show how the White House has succeeded in preserving the broadest possible legal latitude for harsh tactics.
A White House spokesman, Tony Fratto, said Wednesday that he would not comment on any legal opinion related to interrogations. Mr. Fratto added, We have gone to great lengths, including statutory efforts and the recent executive order, to make it clear that the intelligence community and our practices fall within U.S. law and international agreements.
More than two dozen current and former officials involved in counterterrorism were interviewed over the past three months about the opinions and the deliberations on interrogation policy. Most officials would speak only on the condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the documents and the C.I.A. detention operations they govern.
- Part 1: Secret US Endorsement of Severe Interrogations
- Part 2: 'A Place Of Inspiration"
- Part 3: A 'Warped' Office of Legal Counsel
- Part 4: 'You Think You're Making A Difference'
- Part 5: 'Slow It Down'
- Part 6: 'We All Grew Up Together'
- Part 7: 'Like Working With Nuclear Waste'
- Part 8: 'If We Don't Do This, People Will Die'