2
   

Ashcroft refuses to provide Congress memos on use of torture

 
 
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:16 am
Posted on Tue, Jun. 08, 2004
Ashcroft refuses to provide Congress memos on use of torture
By Shannon McCaffrey
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - Attorney General John Ashcroft flatly refused requests from Congressional Democrats on Tuesday to turn over memos that reportedly justified the use of torture in some instances against terrorists.

"This administration rejects torture," Ashcroft told lawmakers.

Ashcroft faced heated questions from Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee over whether the Bush administration has sanctioned torture in its war on terror.

He said Tuesday that President Bush never violated international treaties or U.S. law governing the treatment of prisoners but refused to provide the memos written to the CIA and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

"No, I will not," Ashcroft responded when Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., asked him to provide the documents. Ashcroft explained that the Justice Department's legal guidance to the executive branch and the president must remain confidential.

He also said that Bush has not given blanket immunity to any U.S. agent interrogating al-Qaida captives.

Democrats assailed Ashcroft with a torrent of questions, saying a 2002 Justice Department memo, which carved out instances in which torture might be permissible, paved the way for the now notorious abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Kennedy waved a photo of a dog threatening an Iraqi prisoner as he admonished Ashcroft.

"Because we know when we have these kind of orders what happens," Kennedy said. "We get the stress tests. We get the use of dogs. We get the forced nakedness that we've seen and we get the hooding. That is what directly results when you have that kind of memoranda out there."

Ashcroft said that far from condoning the activities at Abu Ghraib the Justice Department is instead investigating civilians involved for possible criminal violations.

"Let me completely reject the notion that anything this president has done or the Justice Department has done has directly resulted in the kinds of atrocities which were cited," he said.

But Ashcroft's refusal to hand over the torture policy documents, the contents of which have already leaked out in several media outlets, angered Democrats.

"You are not allowed under the Constitution to not answer our questions," said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del. "You all better come up with a good rationale because otherwise it's contempt of Congress."

Asked by Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch. R-Utah, whether the memos were classified, Ashcroft conferred for a long moment with an aide sitting behind him.

"Some of these memos may be classified in some ways for some purposes," he began.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., interrupted him.

"Mr. Attorney General, with all due respect that is a complete evasion," Durbin said. Durbin said the president either had to invoke executive privilege or Ashcroft had to cite a statutory provision allowing him to withhold the memos.

Ashcroft steadfastly refused to do either Tuesday.

"I am refusing to disclose these memos because I believe it is essential to the operation of the executive branch that the president have the opportunity to get information from his attorney general that is confidential," he said.

Republicans on the committee largely ignored the torture issue.

The 2002 Justice Department memo, which was reported in Tuesday's Washington Post, was crafted to provide the CIA with guidance in permissible interrogation techniques for terrorist captives. It said inflicting mental and physical pain might be justified in order to prevent additional attacks on the United States by al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.

The Bush administration contends that members of al-Qaida and the Taliban are not protected by the Geneva Convention prohibiting torture, but insists they have been treated humanely nonetheless.

Another memo prepared by Defense Department lawyers in March 2003 - the same month the United States began the military invasion in Iraq - relied on similar legal reasoning. It said national security trumped federal anti-torture laws and international treaties. The Wall Street Journal reported on that memo Monday.

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee suggest that the Bush administration is secretly reinterpreting U.S. law and the Geneva Convention.

A tight-lipped Ashcroft refused to discuss the memo or even confirm its existence. He said to reveal information about the U.S. interrogation techniques could help members of al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.

Biden persisted.

"If such a memo existed, do you believe that is good law? Do you think that torture might be justified?" he asked.

"I condemn torture," Ashcroft responded. "I don't think it's productive, let alone justified."
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 3,930 • Replies: 85
No top replies

 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:18 am
Bully for Ashcroft!
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:20 am
Gotta keep it secret -
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:33 am
Those who are sworn to uphold the law can't seem to obey them.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:36 am
Seems to me the law is being upheld just fine.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:38 am
Yeap, storm troopers are in control......
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:47 am
The Big Boot of Democracy.

Do you honestly believe the ends justify the means McG?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 09:53 am
He's loyal and blind - I can answer for him without hesitation: Yeap
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 10:01 am
As far as McGentrix is concerned Bush and his ring of evil doers can do no wrong.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 11:17 am
That's not true at all. I think they have made huge mistakes in mollycoddling the left.

Cyclops: What are the ends and what are the means? Do confidential memo's need to be shared? Can there be no communication between the President and his advisors that Congress do not need to know about? I believe that there can be. I would strongly advise these senators to watch their steps lest their own dirty laundry should somehow be exposed...
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 11:24 am
If Ashcroft condemns torture, and it isn't being used in American prisons, then there should be no problem releasing the memo's right? The admin would have no reason to seek protection for something they condemn, and aren't doing.

Transparency is a huge part of democracy McG. The president's legal documents are hardly an issue of national security, unless we are doing something illegal that they are looking for specific protection about.

The fact remains that there is a lot of evidence that says we are using methods of extracting evidence that are neither legal nor morally correct. The fact that the admin is dodging the issue and seeking private council sure doesn't look good.

Remember, our elected officials are public servants. They HAVE to answer to the people. Can you imagine having a servant that kept things from you, and chided you for asking about them?

The problem is that they don't see themselves as servants, at all....

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Umbagog
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:09 pm
Not servants but rulers. Ashcroft is a devil. He says the admin rejects torture, (after they tried to find legal loopholes to allow it ) (or we reject it now that we got caught doing it ).....this isn't going to go away for a couple of good reasons:

1) What kind of government uses torture? A democracy doesn't.
2) If the executive branch is trying to reinterprete laws to allow for torture, what else are they trying to reinterprete?
3) If they can get the legal means to torture foreigners, it won't be long before it will be OK for them to torture US citizens.
4) The claim that terrorists are not a nation, or an army, and therefore are not protected by the Geneva convention sets the stage for allowing torture of American citizen insurgents, since they in of themselves are not nations, nor are they an army. But terrorists in Iraq are fighting to save Iraq from an invading force. They may be spread out all over the world, but they are bound by Islam, and therefore represent a group, not individuals. Furthermore, they are guerilla forces, which are a type of army, as we found out in Vietnam.
5) Redefining the rules of law to suit one's purposes destroys the rule of law.

What you do to the least of them, or us, you do to all of us. This truth is and always has been utterly ignored by rulers, aristocrats, gentry, lords, masters, robber barons, and all the other contemptible lowlifes that feel they are superior and more deserving than others - for whatever reason.

Abu Ghraib is clear and compelling evidence that the republican neocons are abandoning the Grand Experiment in favor of Old World Realities - the very same realities we fought a revolution over - twice, mind you, to put a stop to those old world realities from taking over the New World and putting everyone down into dependent peasant masses. Two centuries later, they are pretty darn close to claiming the empire they have wanted for so long, however, I suspect that it is crumbling down around them even as they reach for it at long last...
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:14 pm
I am sorry you feel that way.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:16 pm
No good response to my points McG?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:18 pm
I'm sorry, you had points?
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:24 pm
fascist crap - sorry you lead such a low life............
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:24 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
If Ashcroft condemns torture, and it isn't being used in American prisons, then there should be no problem releasing the memo's right? The admin would have no reason to seek protection for something they condemn, and aren't doing.


By doing so could set a precednt and lead to further secrets. Their needs to be a safe, honest line of communication between the president and his staff. If that line of communication gets broken, then the president may not be receiving 100% of the information he needs to make the decisions that need to be made.

Quote:
Transparency is a huge part of democracy McG. The president's legal documents are hardly an issue of national security, unless we are doing something illegal that they are looking for specific protection about.


I beg to differ. A certain level of transparency yes, but there are MANY documents that are just nobodies business except for those they are intended.

Quote:
The fact remains that there is a lot of evidence that says we are using methods of extracting evidence that are neither legal nor morally correct. The fact that the admin is dodging the issue and seeking private council sure doesn't look good.


They have stated their position on the issue. that should be enough.

Quote:
Remember, our elected officials are public servants. They HAVE to answer to the people. Can you imagine having a servant that kept things from you, and chided you for asking about them?

The problem is that they don't see themselves as servants, at all....

Cycloptichorn


These servents protect the entire country, they make decisions that effect the safety and security of every single citizen in the US. I hardly feel that equates them to maid status.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:25 pm
Quote:
Cyclops: What are the ends and what are the means? Do confidential memo's need to be shared? Can there be no communication between the President and his advisors that Congress do not need to know about? I believe that there can be. I would strongly advise these senators to watch their steps lest their own dirty laundry should somehow be exposed...


Quote:
If Ashcroft condemns torture, and it isn't being used in American prisons, then there should be no problem releasing the memo's right? The admin would have no reason to seek protection for something they condemn, and aren't doing.

Transparency is a huge part of democracy McG. The president's legal documents are hardly an issue of national security, unless we are doing something illegal that they are looking for specific protection about.

The fact remains that there is a lot of evidence that says we are using methods of extracting evidence that are neither legal nor morally correct. The fact that the admin is dodging the issue and seeking private council sure doesn't look good.

Remember, our elected officials are public servants. They HAVE to answer to the people. Can you imagine having a servant that kept things from you, and chided you for asking about them?

The problem is that they don't see themselves as servants, at all....

Cycloptichorn


How juvenille of you. Of course I had points. Let me sum them up for you again and see if you can continue to say 'bully for ashcroft':

Why will ashcroft not release the memos, if he is truly against torture? Why did the military implement policies allowing it in the first place?

Why is the pres. seeking council on his legal status on the issue of torture if he knew nothing about it?

If they are our public servants, why can we not be allowed to see non-national defense related memos? Transparency is the very definition of Democracy, you're quite the supporter of Democracy, please explain this one to me.

Those are points, phrased as questions for your convienence. I await the answers eagerly...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:30 pm
Quote:
I beg to differ. A certain level of transparency yes, but there are MANY documents that are just nobodies business except for those they are intended.


This is pure bullsh*t right here. Are you sure you aren't a fascist? They are public servants. They have a responsiblity to be open, after all, they are sending these memos on paper WE paid for, or on computers that WE pay for, during the day that WE pay them to serve US. We can ask them any damn thing we please. True, some national defense secrets don't need to be shouted out, but to try to extend that to this case is ridiculous. Noone is going to be hurt by seeing these memos except for Ashcroft and Bush.

Quote:
Quote:
The fact remains that there is a lot of evidence that says we are using methods of extracting evidence that are neither legal nor morally correct. The fact that the admin is dodging the issue and seeking private council sure doesn't look good.


They have stated their position on the issue. that should be enough.


Maybe good enough for someone who continues to take a liar's word at face value. When will you look deeper into issues, McG?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jun, 2004 12:37 pm
Liar's? Can you show me were they have lied?

I don't think any government in the world shows the level of transparancy you are describing.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Ashcroft refuses to provide Congress memos on use of torture
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 09:21:00