CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
Critical Torture Memos ReleasedThis morning we received a crucial torture memo from the CIA in response to our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. ACLU attorneys had to go to court and argue for the release of this particular document, and the judge reviewed these documents in private chambers. According to news reports, this memo lists the specific interrogation methods for use by CIA personnel against prisoners in secret detention centers overseas. But we can't be sure, because a typical page from this document looks like this:
The CIA initially took the position that it could not confirm or deny the existence of this torture memo, but they stopped saying that after President Bush disclosed on September 6, 2006, that the CIA had been operating these overseas detention centers. The heavily redacted memo shows that the Justice Department authorized alternative interrogation methods after concluding that "those carrying out these procedures would not have the specific intent to inflict severe physical pain or suffering" or "to cause severe mental pain or suffering." The memo explains: "Prolonged mental harm is substantial mental harm of sustained duration, e.g. harm lasting months or even years after the acts were inflicted upon the prisoner." The memo also includes this cryptic sentence: "Your review of the literature uncovered no empirical data on the use of these procedures, with the exception [redacted]." The memo is signed by Jay Bybee, who also signed the "organ failure" memo issued to the CIA the same day. Bybee is now an appellate judge for the 9th Circuit. Two more documents were released as well—most interesting is the 2003 memo that indicates that for each session in which "enhanced interrogation techniques" were used, the CIA kept a record of “the nature and duration of each such technique employed” and “the identities of those present,” and includes the names of agents who participated. That information, not surprisingly, is still being withheld.
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. |
)
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
