by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright Octorber 4, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

enying a report that a secret 2005 Justice Dept. memo approved “painful” interrogation techniques, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino rejected the idea that the administration authorized “torture.” Perino cleverly used the word “torture,” to deny that former Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales violated a 2004 anti-torture ban by allowing CIA/Military interrogators to torture information out of suspected terrorists. “This country does not “torture,” insisted Perino. “It is the policy of the United States that we do not torture and we do not,” again, begging the question of whether “water boarding,” “the cold cell,” “long time standing,” “the belly slap,” “attention slap,” and the “attention grab,” constituted “torture.” When Gonzales left the Justice Dept. Sept 14, 2007, it was due primarily to the U.S. attorneys firing scandal, not, illegal wiretapping or the egregious abuse of U.S. anti-torture laws.

      Before heading the Justice Department, Gonzales, a longtime personal friend of President George W. Bush dating back to his days as Texas governor, was White House Counsel, providing wide-ranging legal opinions. In the wake of Sept. 11, Gonzales provided White House legal opinion about captured terrorists, specifically about whether they were prisoners of war. Gonzales helped coin the terms “enemy combatants” or “battlefield detainees,” legal mumbo jumbo, to deny captured prisoners access to the Geneva Convention and U.S. courts. Gonzales' legal opinion helped formulate the basis for denying Guantanamo Bay prisoners habeas corpus, the legal right to petition a court. After Sept. 11, White House officials believed that U.S. national security demanded that interrogators apply maximum pressure to gain all relevant information to prevent future terror attacks.

      American public opinion hasn't condemned too harshly attempts by the CIA or military to extract pertinent information from suspected terrorists. Most citizens have sympathy for the victims, supporting the military and CIA. Under pressure from the Congress, specifically former Vietnam POW Sen. John McCain (R-Az.), the Justice Dept. declared in writing unequivocal opposition to “torture” in 2004. Gonzales' 2005 secret memo authorizing “painful” interrogation techniques appears inconsistent with Justice Dept. policy. Water boarding, which involves binding the prisoner to a board, wrapping the head in cellophane, turning the body upside down and pouring water over the face, simulates death by drowning. “The person believes they are being killed, and as such, it really amounts to a mock execution, which is illegal under international law,” said John Sifton of Human Rights Watch.

      Perino and other White Officials call water boarding “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which does not qualify as torture. Forcing prisoners to stand naked for indefinite periods in a freezing room while getting doused with ice-water, also doesn't meet the White House definition of torture. “Neither Atty. Gen. Gonzales nor anyone else within the department modified or withdrew the that opinion,” said Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse, referring to the 2004 memorandum condemning “enhanced interrogation techniques” as a “abhorrent.” “Accordingly, any advice that the department would have provided in this area would rely upon, and be fully consistent with, the legal standards articulated in the Dec. 2004 memorandum,” read Roehrkasse, hiding behind legalese. Whether called “enhanced” or “painful” interrogation techniques, they fit the definition of torture.

      Perino provided a free X-ray into the White House's tortured logic on interrogation practices. “We know that these ruthless individuals who will do anything, and that they're very patient; that they'll do anything to try to carry out attacks,” Perino told reporters, justifying “enhanced interrogations techniques” that were condemned in the 2004 Justice Dept. memo. “And this president has put in place—all with the foresquare corners of the law—tools in the global war on terror that we need,” admitting that “enhanced” techniques fit outside the technical definition of torture. In late 2005, Gonzales issued another Justice Dept. memo confirming that none the CIA's practices fell outside the law's standard of banning “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment. Perino's statements give the White House excuse for redefining torture and using “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

      All U.S. citizens support the president in protecting national security. White House officials can't have it both ways: Agreeing with a ban on torture and torturing the definition to exclude “enhanced” techniques like “water boarding,” “long time standing” or "the cold cell.” Enhanced techniques yield “bad interrogation, I mean you can get anyone to confess to anything if the torture's bad enough,” said former CIA officer Bob Baer, giving the real reason to ban “enhanced interrogation techniques”: They don't yield actionable intelligence. “What real CIA field officers know firsthand is that it is better to build a relationship of trust than to extract quick confessions through tactics such as those used by the Nazis and Soviets,” said Larry Johnson, former CIA officer and deputy director of the State Department's counterterrorism office. White House officials need to pay attention.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.