Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

It's Official: Obama Will Not Prosecute CIA Torturers

By Jeremy Scahill, Rebel Reports. Posted April 16, 2009.


AG Eric Holder: "It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned ... by DOJ."

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheists, It's Time to Stand Up to Jesus
Russell Blackford, Udo Schuklenk

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Jeremy Scahill

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The White House has announced that CIA operatives, including contractors, who followed Bush guidelines for torturing prisoners will

not

be prosecuted for these actions, regardless of the Obama administration’s position on the legality of the techniques they used. “[I]t is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution,” President Obama said in a

statement

released today. This seems to be part of a deal struck with the CIA over the release of several torture memos today.

“It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.

The Washington Post also reported:

For the first time, officials said that they would provide legal representation at no cost to CIA employees in international tribunals or U.S. congressional inquiries into alleged torture. They also said they would indemnify agency workers against any possible financial judgments.

This comes as the White House released the three “Bradbury” memos, drafted in 2005, detailing CIA ‘enhanced interrogation’ techniques and torture. The administration has also reportedly released a 2002 memo written by Justice Department lawyer John Yoo and signed by Jay Bybee. The New York Times described that memo as “a legal authorization for a laundry list of proposed C.I.A. interrogation techniques.”

The Bradbury memos are named for Steven Bradbury, the former acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel under Bush.

The decision apparently came “after a tense internal debate,” culminating with a  “final round of deliberations” Wednesday night over the release, which was fiercely opposed by the CIA, which said their release would threaten national security. The administration faced a deadline of today for the release of the documents under a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The Bybee memo was put on the table April 2 as part of a negotiation between the ACLU and the White House after the Justice Department asked for a delay of two weeks to make a decision on releasing the Bradbury memos.

There has been much speculation in recent days that the White House may release redacted versions of the memos, which sparked protests from the ACLU and other civil liberties groups and activists. It was also opposed by some administration officials, including Attorney General Holder, who reportedly supported a more complete release. In releasing the documents, Obama cited “exceptional circumstances” compelling him to release them and a desire to correct “erroneous and inflammatory assumptions” about US actions.

If the White House has released them unredacted—and we do not yet know if it has— that would be a victory. But, the apparent deal not to prosecute CIA torturers makes it a very sour victory.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: barack obama, aclu, washington post, prosecutions, eric holder, torture memos

Jeremy Scahill, an independent journalist who reports frequently for the national radio and TV program Democracy Now!, has spent extensive time reporting from Iraq and Yugoslavia. He is currently a Puffin Writing Fellow at The Nation Institute. Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. His writing and reporting is available at RebelReports.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Disappointed
Posted by: JSquercia on Apr 16, 2009 2:42 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am disappointed in a way but my disappointment is tempered by the realization that unlike at Abu Gharib at least the grunts will not pay the price that was rightfully owed by their superiors .
I hope this does NOT preclude the charging the higher ups who authorized the illegal methods and those who pushed for them to give the OK to disregard the rule of law . That would be of course Bush , Cheney , Yoo , Gonzales etc.

I love to hear O Lielly rant about Spain looking into Human Rights Violations . Had no problem when they went after Milosovik

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Disappointed Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: Disappointed Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Disappointed Posted by: EinMD
OF COURSE NOT
Posted by: ds1st on Apr 16, 2009 4:55 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush has done nothing wrong. What he put in place is needed.

Obama grasps this and of course will not prosecute Bush for doing the correct thing.

CRY BABY LIBRALS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: OF COURSE NOT Posted by: EinMD
» RE: OF COURSE NOT Posted by: Quannah
Weasel words
Posted by: wrinklemomma on Apr 16, 2009 9:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More weasel words from spineless equivocators. Just exactly what does one need to do to violate the law and subvert the Constitution to get these chickenasses to do something? They violated American and international law! They crapped on the Constitution- just like most of Bush's cronies. Holder couldn't find his own butt with two hands and a flashlight, OF COURSE he can't find any criminal behavior in the former administration! What kind of chickenass cowards hang out at the DOJ? Courts routinely reverse prior rulings- you tel me this AG can't reverse the former one? Can't OR won't?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As Congress and the President hold National Prayer Day
Posted by: Mrs. Jefferson on Apr 16, 2009 9:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They had better pray for their corrupt and ugly souls. They are murderers and genocidal if they haven't noticed.

Obama's religion is important to him so he buys votes with his Faith Based Charity programs.

Whose God is this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Obama's Holy Trinity Posted by: DrBrian
What did anyone expect?
Posted by: folkie on Apr 16, 2009 11:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is now Torturer-in-Chief.

He, along with the Democratic Party leadership, supported the Bush/Cheney agenda, took impeachment off the table, and never opposed anything the Bush administration did.

Spineless? Not in the way they took impeachment off the table. Not in the way Obama pushed through the bailouts when there was 90% public opposition and he hadn't yet been elected and risked alienating 90% of American voters.

Didn't have the numbers? Well, now they do and they're not acting any differently.

People who vote for torture won't prosecute torturers. People who go along to get along with torture won't prosecute torturers. And people who allow torture to be carried out under their command won't prosecute anyone for torture.

90% of the American public opposed the bailouts and Obama didn't care. You don't have 90% opposed to torture, so why should Obama care?

In order to increase the military budget and expand the wars, Obama has to keep the lies about 9/11 and terrorists going, which means wringing false confessions from innocent people, and that can only be done with torture.

Or does anyone think that people who will torture are too moral to tell lies?

Nobody could have put the explosives in World Trade Towers One, Two, and Seven, without Larry Silverstein and Marvin Bush knowing about it. No Saudis with box cutters could have ordered our air defenses to stand down for hours--Dick Cheney was the sole person in charge.

I remember telling an elderly Jewish woman who had come to the U.S. after WWII as a refugee from Nazi Germany, that 9/11 was an inside job and she was shocked. "Our government wouldn't do anything like that," she told me. I'm sure she thought the same about the German government before the Reichstag fire and the Holocaust, which is why she hadn't left earlier. Some people can see the same things happen twice in their lifetime and still not learn anything.

The torture at Guantanamo has gotten worse since Obama took office, because he didn't think stopping it was important enough to send somebody there to ensure that it stopped. So if those carrying it out under his command could be prosecuted, so could he. If his predecessor could be prosecuted, so could he.

Nobody is going to be prosecuted as long as we have a fascist government torturing people, waging wars of aggression based on lies, and making trillions of dollars war profiteering--at least not by the Torturer-in-Chief or anyone in his administration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Weasel-in-Chief of the Rogue Superpower
Posted by: DrBrian on Apr 17, 2009 3:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is spineless rather than pragmatic, clever rather than intelligent, slick rather than profound, craven rather than courageous and a deft maintainer of the status quo rather than a transformational leader.

Drugs possession violators harm only themselves, common criminals harm one person or a small number of people, but war criminals harm the nation. Not only are their actions manifestly unlawful and ethically repulsive, but military and intelligence sources admit that they are a recruiting boon to terrorists and have done nothing at all to enhance our security. Our allies are dismayed and wary of cooperating with us, and anti-Americanism is on the rise worldwide.

Obama's Nixonian justification that it's all right to commit egregious crimes if the president ordered it is disgusting, not to say fascist. Surely these well educated goons knew that slamming heads into walls, binding people in positions calculated to damage nerves and joints, disappearing people and, in dozens of cases torturing them to death, was a crime.

There is thus no accountability, no deterrent to future atrocities, no acknowledgment of the suffering, humanity and rights of the victims, no signal to our friends and enemies that we care about human rights.

The US should immediately quit its effort to obtain a UN Human Rights seat, stop publishing human rights reports and speaking out about other nations' atrocities, and sit in the rogues' gallery in ignominious silence with Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and, yes, Israel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Slick Willy All Over Again Posted by: oregoncharles
"fiercely opposed by the CIA, which said their release would threaten national security. "
Posted by: oregoncharles on Apr 17, 2009 7:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, "national security," as usual, means the personal job security of guilty officials.

So what is the Obama administration's stake in protecting those guilty of crimes against humanity? Why would they do that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement