Updated After a tense internal debate, President Obama officially announced this afternoon that his administration would not prosecute C.I.A. operatives for carrying out controversial interrogations of terrorist suspects, as the Justice Department began releasing a number of detailed memos describing harsh techniques used against Al Qaeda suspects in secret overseas prisons.
“In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carrying out their duties relying in good faith upon the legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution,” Mr. Obama said in a statement issued by the White House.
Searchable versions of the released documents may be viewed here.
Saying that it is a “time for reflection, not retribution,” Mr Obama reiterated his opposition to a extensive investigation of controversial counterterrorism programs. The interrogation methods were among the Bush administration’s most closely guarded secrets, and today’s release will be the most comprehensive public accounting to date of the interrogation program that some senior Obama administration officials have said used illegal torture.
The documents are expected to include Justice Department memos from 2002 and 2005 authorizing the C.I.A. to employ a number of aggressive techniques- including sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme temperatures and “waterboarding,” the near-drowning technique.
Among the anticipated documents are detailed 2005 memos by Stephen G. Bradbury, who as acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel authorized the C.I.A. techniques. The documents have never before been made public, but an article in The New York Times in October 2007 said that the memos gave legal support for using a combination of coercive techniques at the same time and concluded that the C.I.A.’s methods were not “cruel, inhuman or degrading” under international law.
Another document expected to be released this afternoon is a Justice Department memo written August 1, 2002. The memo, written by John C. Yoo and signed by Jay S. Bybee, two Justice Department officials at the time, is a legal authorization for a laundry list of proposed C.I.A. interrogation techniques.
The debate about just how much detail to include in the public release bitterly divided an Obama administration still in early months. Fueling the urgency of the discussion was today’s court deadline in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which had sued the government for the release of the Justice Department memos.
Leon E. Panetta, the C.I.A. director, has pressed the White House for weeks to redact sensitive details about specific interrogation techniques. He argued that revealing such information would pave the way for future disclosures of intelligence sources and methods, and would jeopardize the C.I.A.’s relationship with foreign intelligence services.
But the most immediate concern of C.I.A. officials is that the revelations could give new momentum to a full-blown congressional investigation into covert activities under the Bush Administration.
Other Obama administration officials, including Gregory B. Craig, the White House counsel, and Attorney General Eric H. Holder, argued that releasing the documents not only would satisfy the government’s obligation in the lawsuit, but would also put distance between President Obama and some of his predecessor’s most controversial policies.
On Wednesday, Mr. Obama’s top advisers met at the White House for the final round of deliberations over the interrogation documents.
From 1 to 25 of 554 Comments
“After a tense internal debate, the Obama administration this afternoon will make public a number of detailed memos describing the harsh interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency against al Qaeda suspects in secret overseas prisons.”
Really please do you people think there was an intense debate? Really come on people wake up and smell the coffee. This is an indictment of the Bush policies on fighting terrorist.
— James (San Diego)“…the most immediate concern of C.I.A. officials is that the revelations could give new momentum to a full-blown congressional investigation into covert activities under the Bush Administration.”
Let’s hope so. Leaders are accountable under our system. No ifs, ands, or buts.
I’d like to know if people like Stephen G. Bradbury, John C. Yoo, and Jay S. Bybee have ever served in the front lines, or if they’re chicken hawks living out their warrior fantasies like bush, cheney, and the rest of the republican neocons.
Not that they’d be any less culpable…i’d just like to know how much scorn to heap on them.
— JP, milltown, njIf Republican really think these interrogation methods were legal and moral they would have no reason to object to these memos being revealed. But they do object, because they know that this was illegal and immoral torture, and they hate to be exposed to the light.
— Dan QuixoteGood.
— DonOThank God. Obama made the right choice.
— SECGlad these will finally see the light of day as democracy (like detainees) ultimately dies behind closed doors.
— ScientificiaThis must have been a difficult meeting for Obama and no doubt some of the things that have been done in the name of ordinary Americans will shock us. While I believe that the Bush Administration had their hearts in the right place in wanting to keep the country safe, the Constitution of the nation is sarcosanct.The Constitution of the United States is bigger and greater than Al Qaeda will ever hope to be; it has survived wars and conflicts through the ages. The right way to change it is to ask the Congress and the 50 States in the Union for consent.
There’s nothing partisan about the Constitution and there shouldn’t be anything partisan about examining the actions done on the instructions of those entrusted to preserve, protect and defend it. I hope that the lessons we draw from this chapter in our history are the right ones. We know Bush and Cheney were trying to keep America safe, that doesn’t exempt them from examination if they violated the oaths that gave them the authority to do it.
— AxlUnreal. Do these wizards in the Obama administration realize that we are still fighting two wars and have soldiers in far away places in the line of fire as we speak? There is absolutely no reason to release any of these memos, knowing full well that it will only further endanger our brave soldiers. And the stated reason above: to put distance between the two administrations. Is that it? Seriously? To score political points in the left leaning part of the world?
So will these memos also include the valuable information and intelligence we learned from these interrogations? The lives they may have saved? Of course not, because that would not fit into the Obama administration’s narrow political goals in their release of these memos. I have never seen an administration so politically motivated and blind to the danger it puts our troops in. All to score cheap political points. These people are incredibly craven.
Someone refresh my memory please: Did the Bush administration rush to print the internal memos drafted by Eric Holder justifying the pardoning of Marc Rich and the FALN terrorists by Clinton?
— David NYCLet’s see how Gerson and Rove spin this. No doubt they’ll try…
— Charles MathewesGood for Obama. The crimes of the Bush administration must be brought to light: not only because those responsible for torture should be prosecuted, but so the American people know what was done in their name, and we can ensure that this never happens again.
— JDIt’s about time, Obama. But you’ve got a lot more work to do to air the corruption out of the government.
— SpaceCatExcellent. Transparency and disclosure. It’s change we can believe in.
— rtsIt is time for a full and truthful accounting of the crimes of the Bush administration.
— HDThis is a good first step toward restoring our moral standing in the world. Now, if we can also have a special prosecutor assigned to look into who may have violated the Constitution & when, then we are truly on the path toward taking our country back.
— Laughing PlanetInvestigate them. Try them. Convict them. Imprison them. From the amoral junior assistant legal counsel to panic-attacked ex-Vice President, to the wrong-headed ex-President.
There are no laws more important than those they are accused of violating. No consequence is graver than that of allowing them to escape justice. There is no such thing as an extenuating circumstance unless the law finds it so after a trial.
— Barry BlitsteinSome of you people on this blog are nuts. This does nothing but weaken our National Security! What is wrong with some of you? It’s also an attempt by the Obama administration to improve his plummeting approval ratings since that is all this very shallow president is all about. It will backfire on him for sure.
— VinnyI’m disappointed that we won’t be learning how we applied to these terrorists the punishments described in Sharia law…
— Augustine 25“There is a crack in everything, that’s how the light gets in” to quote the iconic Leonard Cohen lyrics from one of his powerful musical compositions. We’ve been waiting a long time for this “crack” to appear and shed some light on the shenanigans of the likes of John Yoo & Co.
— patricia monagleWhy was there any intense debate? The Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross is replete with reports of a brutal course of obscenely barbaric conduct committed by our intelligence community,at the direction of our Justice Department and our presidency, on behalf of our citizens. Its publication, to my best knowledge, has been limited to a report by Professor Mark Danner in the April 30th issue of the New York Review of Books. The nature and extent of the conduct observed in the ICRC report is specified at page 49 of the NYRB article by Professor Danner, which is entitled “The Red Cross Torture Report: What it Means.” It is important that the nature and extent of the savage pattern of conduct devised by the Bush Department of Justice and the Office of White House Counsel be thoroughly communicated to the American people. I believe that it is also important that obvious past crimes be assigned responsibility and not sanctioned in this countrry’s name, regardless of the aristocracy of the perpetuators, if the American and International rule of Law are to have any meaning. Otherwise history and the world will judge this country upon the knowledge of the crimes committed by our agents, purportedly on our behalf. Walwyn M. Trezise, JD. 1962, retired lawyer, now residing in Dubois, Wyoming.
— Walwyn TreziseMy first response was to let out the breath I didn’t realize I’d been holding in until now: Thank God. I was so afraid he wouldn’t do the right thing.
— Sarah in San DiegoI think there is a pretty basic misunderstanding shared among some of the commenters here and elsewhere: the memos in question are NOT *intelligence* documents. They’re legal documents, and there’s a huge difference.
— Sarah in San DiegoThese documents are not intelligence documents. They are legal documents. It does not weaken our National Security. The public should know the legal doctrines under which the U.S. Government conducted itself regarding interrogation techniques.
Get a grip, people.
— cab91Contrary to what Cheney and his supporters insist, releasing these memos will only benefit national security. The Bush admininstration’s abrogation of American values through torture and abuse of “detainees” only strengthened Islamist terrorists and gave them a valuable recruiting tool. The Obama’s administration’s (apparent) commitment to restoring what makes America unique in the world will restore our credibility and standing, and stem the hatred that fuels terrorism.
Admitting past transgressions and tearing down the Bush administration’s wall of secrecy is the first step toward restoring America’s lost stature and returning to the values that made us a great and admired nation. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and their inner circle apparently believed that “protecting America” required them to destroy what makes America worth protecting. By illuminating the darkness (and possibly opening the door to accountabilty for those who violated laws and the Constitution), the Obama administration is showing the world that he repudiates the Bush administration’s ideology that has done so much damage.
There really does seem to be hope.
— TedTo David NYC :
Your arguments, thought processes and logic run contrary to the truth.
Our heroic sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, aunts, uncles and others who serve America proudly will be safer because the airing of the Bush Administration’s crimes against humanity represent solid evidence that those crimes will not be a part of the Obama Administration’s work toward keeping America safe.
Amen to doing what’s right, just and moral.
— David A. StevensonVinny (#16, 12:33 pm) wrote:
“It’s also an attempt by the Obama administration to improve his plummeting approval ratings.”
That’s an interesting argument, but one that would carry a lot more weight if Obama’s approval ratings weren’t still sky-high. Favorable ratings in the high 60’s and unfavorable ratings in the high 20’s equal a pretty popular President who doesn’t need to appease his base. Obama’s doing this because it’s good policy and it’s right.
— Matt in Michigan