"First of all," Attorney General John Ashcroft told senators on Tuesday,
"this administration opposes torture." His proof? The administration is
prosecuting cases of torture and mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib
prison. So far, six Army prison guards await court-martial and a seventh has
pleaded guilty. Meanwhile, the evidence continues to mount showing the
administration built a case that torture is within the legal bounds of its
power in the war on terror. Ashcroft refused to release an August 2002
memo -- which is not classified -- when asked for it on Tuesday by senators.
But a Pentagon report based in part on the logic presented in the DOJ memo,
that President Bush is above domestic and international laws of torture when
it comes to interrogating terror suspects, is online here.
http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/rep...q7&Content=385

The Washington Post today reports that the DOJ memo Ashcroft won't release
turns the focus on the role President Bush has played in setting the rules
for interrogations of terrorism suspects.

"A former senior administration official involved in discussions about CIA
interrogation techniques said Bush's aides knew he wanted them to take an
aggressive approach."

"'He felt very keenly that his primary responsibility was to do everything
within his power to keep the country safe, and he was not concerned with
appearances or politics or hiding behind lower-level officials,' he said.
'That is not to say he was ready to authorize stuff that would be contrary
to law. The whole reason for having the careful legal reviews that went on
was to ensure he was not doing that.'"

"The August memorandum was written in response to a CIA request for legal
guidance in the months after Sept. 11, 2001, as agency operatives began to
detain and interrogate key al Qaeda leaders. The fact that the memo was
signed by Jay S. Bybee, head of the Office Legal Counsel, who has since
become a federal judge, and is 50 pages long indicates that the issue was
treated as a significant matter."

"'Given the topic and length of opinion, it had to get pretty high-level
attention,' said Beth Nolan, commenting on the process that was in place
when she was President Bill Clinton's White House counsel, from 1999 to
2001, and, previously, when she was a lawyer in the Justice Department's
Office of Legal Counsel."

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 01:36:56 GMT, "Jim" wrote:


The Washington Post today reports that the DOJ memo Ashcroft won't release
turns the focus on the role President Bush has played in setting the rules
for interrogations of terrorism suspects.

"A former senior administration official involved in discussions about CIA
interrogation techniques said Bush's aides knew he wanted them to take an
aggressive approach."

Why would this guy not let his name be used?

"'He felt very keenly that his primary responsibility was to do everything
within his power to keep the country safe, and he was not concerned with
appearances or politics or hiding behind lower-level officials,' he said.
'That is not to say he was ready to authorize stuff that would be contrary
to law. The whole reason for having the careful legal reviews that went on
was to ensure he was not doing that.'"

What is wrong with the above? Sounds like the WP is endorsing Bush's actions.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John H wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 01:36:56 GMT, "Jim" wrote:



The Washington Post today reports that the DOJ memo Ashcroft won't release
turns the focus on the role President Bush has played in setting the rules
for interrogations of terrorism suspects.

"A former senior administration official involved in discussions about CIA
interrogation techniques said Bush's aides knew he wanted them to take an
aggressive approach."


Why would this guy not let his name be used?


Heheheh. A tad naive, eh?




"'He felt very keenly that his primary responsibility was to do everything
within his power to keep the country safe, and he was not concerned with
appearances or politics or hiding behind lower-level officials,' he said.
'That is not to say he was ready to authorize stuff that would be contrary
to law. The whole reason for having the careful legal reviews that went on
was to ensure he was not doing that.'"


What is wrong with the above? Sounds like the WP is endorsing Bush's actions.



No, it reads like the WP reporter is quoting what his source told him.



John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!