Rice’s Legal Adviser Won’t Condemn Waterboarding Of U.S. Citizens By Foreign Intel Services
Rice’s Legal Adviser Won’t Condemn Waterboarding Of U.S. Citizens By Foreign Intel Services
During a Guardian-sponsored debate about international law on October 24, John Bellinger, the legal adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, refused to call waterboarding torture — even if it was used “on an American national by a foreign intelligence service.”
Bellinger hedged when international law professor Philipe Sands asked if he could “imagine any circumstances” where use of the interrogation technique would be “justified” against an American citizen. “One would have to apply the facts to the law, the law to the facts,” he said.
“That just strikes me as very curious,” responded Sands. “Well, I’m not willing to include it or exclude it,” retorted Bellinger:
PHILIPPE SANDS: Let me put it in yet another way. Could you imagine any circumstances in which the use of water boarding on an American national by a foreign intelligence service could be justified?
JOHN BELLINGER: One would have to apply the facts to the law, the law to the facts, to determine whether any technique, whatever it happened to be, would cause severe physical pain or suffering.
SANDS: So you’re willing to exclude any American going to the international criminal court under any circumstances, but you’re not able to exclude the possibility of water boarding being used on a United States national by foreign intelligence service? I mean, that just strikes me as very curious.
BELLINGER: Well, I’m not willing to include it or exclude it.
Bellinger did concede, however, that the Bush administration’s evasiveness on whether waterboarding is torture “makes it very difficult to explain to the world and to provide the important assurance” that America’s post-9/11 policies are within the confines of international law. Listen to it:
Bellinger’s inability to condemn waterboarding as torture, even if practiced on American citizens, is extremely disappointing considering his reputation as one of the voices in the administration that would routinely argue against the efforts of Vice President Cheney and his lawyer, David Addington, to push the legal boundaries.
But it’s not altogether surprising, given his record of deference to Cheney in public. In October 2006, after Cheney called waterboarding a “no brainer,” Bellinger refused to contradict the Vice President, saying only that “Congress would have to determine whether specific interrogation techniques were permissible under the Geneva conventions.”
UPDATE: Retired judge Evan Wallach notes how the United States military justice system has prosecuted “waterboarding” as a form of torture since the Spanish-American war.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
49 Responses to “Rice’s Legal Adviser Won’t Condemn Waterboarding Of U.S. Citizens By Foreign Intel Services”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Just another pathetic disgusting slimy freak doing his little part to sell out the Constitution, the rule of law, and this country.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:10 amJust another pathetic disgusting slimy freak doing his little part to sell out the Constitution, the rule of law, and this country.
Comment by VerbalKint — November 5, 2007 @ 11:10 am
And just more proof that Darth is the real engine running the BushCo Cabal and that everyone is afraid of getting shot in the face (or Tillman’ed by Blackwater) if they speak out against anything he wants.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:14 amyes, shoot now ask questions later… = free pass for breaking the law.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:14 amHow long is 14 months? Way too long. With this Administration and this excuse for a Congress, much can be dismantled in that time. And even then we’re not guaranteed to elect people that will do anything to change the course we’re on.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:15 amDon’t you just love the inability of these clowns to answer any question with anything that make sense?
November 5th, 2007 at 11:19 amVote TP for best liberal blog
http://2007.weblogawards.org/polls/best-liberal-blog-1.php
November 5th, 2007 at 11:20 amNone of these people can condemn waterboarding, to do so would mean that bush and his administration could be held for war crimes. So… It’s a big “screw you” not only to the United States citizenry, but also to our military men and women.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:20 amAs a non-American I can’t believe that your Democratic Party doesn’t take a stand against this BS
November 5th, 2007 at 11:23 amThe only disappointment of Bush/Cheney/Rice etal. is that after they outed Valerie Plame she didn’t get waterboarded before she lost her job.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:25 amI’m torn on this one.
He is making a valid point that if America does not consider waterboarding to be torture, then it is hard to criticize others for the use of it. There’s a clear - and uncomfortable - logic in admitting this reality, in fact it might be Bellinger’s way of beginning to have the criminality addressed.
Of course the fact we are even having this debate is the real tragedy, but Bellinger’s attitude here is a cut above the lying and hypocrisy that is the MO for King George and his water-carriers.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:37 amThis shouts loud and clear that we have waterboarded and continue to waterboard.
The only way to stop this (and other administration crimes) is through impeachment. Call for it! Support Kuchinich on Tuesday!
November 5th, 2007 at 11:41 amOnce again and it seems so straight forward:
Anyone who won’t declare waterboarding as torture, or who equivocates, should be made to experience it first hand. Maybe that will help them make the determination.
Ah, the morality of it all: kill, torture, spy and lie…for OIL.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:41 am[….Applying the law to the facts..,applying the facts to the law.. ]. He’s playing 3 cards game.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:44 amSo the Legal Adviser is not willing to say if he would include it or exclude it (waterboarding) as a form of torture.
Here we have a top government legal adviser treating the American people like children. What he’s really saying is “cuz, just cuz”.
“Daddy, why do I have to go to school?”
“Cuz, honey, just cuz.”
“Daddy, why do I have to eat my vegetables?”
“Cuz, honey, just cuz.”
“Daddy, why do I have to play with my little brother?”
“Cuz, honey, just cuz.”
“Legal Adviser, why can’t you tell us if waterboarding is torture?”
“Cuz, honey, just cuz.”
This has become an authoritarian government that doesn’t feel it has to answer to the people.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:45 amI’m torn on this one.
He is making a valid point that if America does not consider waterboarding to be torture, then it is hard to criticize others for the use of it. There’s a clear - and uncomfortable - logic in admitting this reality, in fact it might be Bellinger’s way of beginning to have the criminality addressed.
Comment by Dumb_Fox
The Geneva Convention makes it illegal, and we are a signatory to the treaty - which makes it the law of the land in the USA. We have prosecuted people for the practice before.
The only reason - THE ONLY REASON - we are discussing this now is that the Bush administration has been torturing prisoners for years and they fear they have criminal liability for their behavior. They again are destroying our rule of law - and world standing - to cover for the behavior of this rogue administration. History will harshly judge those who don’t see this very clear and unambigous truth.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:46 am…Wallach recalls a time when U.S. military leaders knew waterboarding was torture — when they prosecuted and convicted Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American prisoners of war after World War II, during the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, known as the Tokyo War Crimes Trials.
Here’s the testimony of Air Force Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, who was captured by the Japanese in 1942: “I was given several types of torture … I was given what they call the water cure.” Asked how it felt, Nielsen replied, “Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death.” Several Japanese torturers were convicted in the trials, and “the principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding,” Wallach says….
http://www.salon.com/ opinion/ walsh/ misc/ 2007/ 11/ 04/ waterboarding_schumer/ index.html
November 5th, 2007 at 11:51 amRe: your statement that “Bellinger’s inability to condemn waterboarding as torture, even if practiced on American citizens,is extremely disappointing . . ..”
Torture is torture. It is not “practiced” it is “performed” or perhaps “inflicted.” A profession is practiced. Musical instruments are practicied.
And Shayne, how do you know that Valerie Plame wasn’t waterboarded before she was outed. My understanding of our knowledge and use of waterboarding is that we took it from all the unlawful things people did to us and decided to use it on them. She was covert, was subject to arbitrary detention and torture without US cover. So perhaps she was. It’s too bad you can’t be waterboaded before you open your mouth about something you only wish you understood. if it’s so damn pleasant, let’s start a holiday trend. Santa Claus does waterboarding. All of you who believe it’s no big deal, step right on up. Yeah, I thought so.
The fact that he won’t condemn it if done on Americans is noteworthy, no doubt. But his refusal to condemn it outright is the real problem here.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:54 amSo then, if an American soldier is waterboarded and the perpetrators are “brought to justice”, would not statements like those of Rice and Bellinger basically be a “get out of jail free” card.
Honestly your honor, I didn’t think it was torture. And it the best minds in the WH don’t see it as toture, how was I supposed to understand it ?
Why do they hate our troops ????
November 5th, 2007 at 11:56 amBut the sycophants say that waterboarding is legal and not torture, or they puff their chests out and tears well up in their eyes and they say they would do anything to save American lives.
If waterboarding isn’t torture, how about if we put plastic wrap over a guy’s nose and mouth until he passes out. Scary, but no permanent damage done right?
Put him naked in a freezer until he pass out from hypothermia, then revive him. No permanent harm.
Then put him in an oven until he passes out from hyperthermia and again revive him.
Put him in a pressure chamber and then relieve the pressure suddenly so he gets air bubbles in the blood stream, I understand that is incredibly painful but if you don’t die, it’s not torture right?
Put large stones on his chest until he can’t breathe, wait until the last spark dies out on the EKG, and resucitate him. He’ll be fine.
It’s all good because the Pathetic President says “We don’t torture.†And he wouldn’t lie to us would he?
Would he???
November 5th, 2007 at 11:57 amHOW DARE SOMEONE USE LOGIC against these pea-brained little Bush apologists!
November 5th, 2007 at 12:00 pmThis is all so Soviet.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:03 pmEventually, someone is going to waterboard an American soldier and there isn’t a damned thing this administration will be able to say against it and not look like a total hypocrite.
And how do you think this military will react when this administration refuses to condemn the torture of one of their own?
November 5th, 2007 at 12:03 pmCaption: Do you see any blood on these hands? Of course not - I licked it off before coming out here.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:09 pmTorture has been documented by our government - and GW666 and Crew should be taken out of office and spend a little quality time at the Hague.
This is their way of ok’ing torture in their minds. If you say it’s not torture enough, then it’s not…right?
Buck Fush
November 5th, 2007 at 12:12 pmBilly Hill sez:
It’s funny how anyone who knows anything about intelligence operations states unequivocally that torture is a completely unreliable method of extracting intel…but neocon watercarriers like Billy stubbornly cling to the fiction that torture can extract vital information that can save thousands of lives.
It’s even funnier how anyone who has actually been through the process of waterboarding states unequivocally that it is torture…but neocon watercarriers like Billy stubbornly cling to the fiction that waterboarding is merely a “harsh interrogation technique” by continually attempting to redefine the term “torture”.
You’re a scream, Billy. Do go on…
November 5th, 2007 at 12:20 pmAnd the great sycophant POS skinhead from the Northwest shows up.
Come verga Billy.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:21 pmlittle bill walks up the hill
November 5th, 2007 at 12:22 pmto fetch himself some attention
when no one responds
he cries for his mom
and fades back into oblivion
The Geneva Convention makes it illegal, and we are a signatory to the treaty - which makes it the law of the land in the USA. We have prosecuted people for the practice before.
The only reason - THE ONLY REASON - we are discussing this now is that the Bush administration has been torturing prisoners for years and they fear they have criminal liability for their behavior. They again are destroying our rule of law - and world standing - to cover for the behavior of this rogue administration. History will harshly judge those who don’t see this very clear and unambigous truth.
Comment by StratRat — November 5, 2007 @ 11:46 am
I agree with you.
On a moral level, torture is evil, waterboarding is torture, therefore waterboarding is evil.
If only winning the debate was that simple.
My point is that Bellinger is making what I see as a coherent legal argument, and I am torn between using it as a reason for arguing against waterboarding, or decrying the very fact he is equivocating over whether waterboarding is torture.
If we all existed on the same moral plane, waterboarding would still be torture. Given the current situation, I think it’s also helpful to illustrate how counterproductive waterboarding is.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:27 pmI think this is one of the best pieces I’ve read on the subject.
In it, the writer quotes Nance, who was a master trainer at SERE and has recently been vehement about the nature of waterboarding. This is from a trip that Nance took to Cambodia:
November 5th, 2007 at 12:32 pmYou gotta love the hypothetical situation where you have caught the bad guy, he knows where the bomb is, and you have two hours to get it out of him. That justifies torture right?
Here’s a similar hypothetical. A cab driver, Colin McKenna, shows up at the police station with his wife and two kids and says he witnessed some swarthy little bastards setting a bomb in the stadium and it’s going to go off in two hours during the football game. The darkies told him that if he told anyone they would kill the kids. What to do, what to do???
You try torturing him, but the mick’s a tough one. You have an hour left and Billy Hill says, “threaten to kill his kids, he’ll talk.†So Billy puts a pistol to the daughter’s ear and tells Colin he’d better start talking, but Colin doesn’t because after all it’s America and we don’t do that sort of thing, right?
But Billy says that we have 50,000 Americans in that stadium, we have to get this guy to talk, and pulls the trigger. Then points it at the son’s head. After Billy licks the blood off his fingers, he grabs a pencil and starts writing because it worked. Colin is sobbing and holding the pieces of hair in his hands and tells them exactly where the bomb is.
It’s worth it right? Sure cold blooded murder is wrong, but you saved all those people.
But when you get to the stadium and find the bomb, it’s just the guts from an old computer and a note that says “Ha ha ha, fooled you. Jefferson High Rules!!â€
November 5th, 2007 at 12:32 pmHey yo….get your waterboards here…..just in time for Christmas
Comment by Billy Hill — November 5, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
How ironic.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:35 pmCould a fiction novelist write anything this bizarre? They’re melting down.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:39 pmIf we all existed on the same moral plane, waterboarding would still be torture. Given the current situation, I think it’s also helpful to illustrate how counterproductive waterboarding is.
Comment by Dumb_Fox
Fair enough, but therein lies the problem - we are discussing something which has already been settled: Waterboarding is a form of torture which has been used since the Spanish Inquisition. It has been outlawed, and we have prosecuted people for the practice. We have treaties which forbid the use of the practice, and before Bush, we had a moral compass which we followed. We have faced many greater threats than AQ.
The discussion should not include esoteric ideas such as: the current situation, moral planes, techniques, productive - not productive, effective - not effective, etc…Once we have opened the Pandora’s Box of “wiggle room of defending the practice - we have already lost our way. The world is watching, and they will take our lead. Is this what we want?
November 5th, 2007 at 12:45 pmThe discussion should not include esoteric ideas such as: the current situation, moral planes, techniques, productive - not productive, effective - not effective, etc…Once we have opened the Pandora’s Box of “wiggle room of defending the practice - we have already lost our way. The world is watching, and they will take our lead. Is this what we want?
Comment by StratRat — November 5, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
Well, I think most of the world will let us go our own way and respect us less. Just as happens with the death penalty.
I find this debate hugely dispiriting, and there is a large part of me that feels that the esoteric ideas as you call them should not come into the equation. But many on the Right hinge their defense of the technique on an argument that it works. And thus it seems worth demonstrating that it doesn’t work; or it is counterproductive.
I can see the downsides to entering into this debate, but if it can succeed in changing enough minds, then perhaps it should be done.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pmahhh, nothing like a little torture contortion from the bush/cheney regime - that paragon of humanity, honesty, and morality.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:07 pm.
JOHN BELLINGER: One would have to apply the facts to the law, the law to the facts, to determine whether any technique, whatever it happened to be, would cause severe physical pain or suffering.
———————————————————–
Apparently, MENTAL pain or suffering doesn’t count — even though it’s included in the United Nations definition of torture. Waterboarding doesn’t leave physical scars, but can leave mental scars lasting for years, or even for life.
If John Bellinger (or anyone else) has questions about whether or not waterboarding constitutes torture, they should undergo the procedure until all doubt is removed.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:20 pmWell, I think most of the world will let us go our own way and respect us less. Just as happens with the death penalty.
Comment by Dumb_Fox — November 5, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
I disagree with you only on the point that “most of the world will let us go our own way.” They do this on the death penalty because we apply that to our own. If we only tortured our own people, the rest of the world wouldn’t really care.
But we (allegedly) torture people from other countries in war conditions. This is not a situation where others will let us go our own way. We are making up the rules of war to suit our purposes, while we ignore United Nations statutes and the Geneva Convention. And when you take it upon yourself to change the rules, expect the other players to follow suit.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:26 pmWar Criminals! The USA does Torture! It does teacht how to torture as it did to many military personel from Latin America who went to “the school of the Americas”. The USA support anti-democratic regimes, as it is doing right now with Pakistan! USA=WAR CRIMINALS. USA=TORTURE! To the ones that refuse to admit that waterboarding is torture, I suggest to go through the procedure, USA style!
November 5th, 2007 at 1:32 pmI can see the downsides to entering into this debate, but if it can succeed in changing enough minds, then perhaps it should be done.
Comment by Dumb_Fox
Honest, constructive debate is always a good thing. A few years ago, the vast majority of Americans would scoff at the idea that we are debating if torture is effective or not. Now, there are discussions going on around the water cooler everyday - in offices everywhere.
The right side is a simple minded animal. The simpler the solutions, the better. You seem like a sensitive person and I would ask you what I ask lots of right siders about torture: If someone was to drown you, or shove hot metal under your fingernails, would you tell them what they wanted to hear? Of course you would. The problem though is that if the person being tortured really DOESN’T KNOW, then you get bogus information.
Anyway, I am saddened that this is even up for discussion. but then the last 6 years of the Bush criminal enterprise has given sane, thoughtful people lots to be ashamed of. I hope we can recover our pride and glory.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:34 pmAnd when you take it upon yourself to change the rules, expect the other players to follow suit.
Comment by missmolly — November 5, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
Some will follow, no question. Probably those that already prop up the Amnesty International sick-bast*rd league tables.
But the reason this Bellinger argument has weight is precisely because most other countries will not follow suit. So you either leverage the argument, or you go down the Stratman route of pointing out that waterboarding has long been deemed torture and leave it at that.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:39 pmAnyway, I am saddened that this is even up for discussion. […]
Comment by StratRat — November 5, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
Undoubtedly that is the saddest aspect of all.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:50 pmSomeone may have beaten me to the punch with this, but I’m still of the opinion that ANYONE who is uncertain that waterboarding is torture should be subjected to a short (90 minutes or so) session of waterboarding to see if that might provide some insight. (I’ll bet you that these people who currently “don’t know” if waterboarding’s torture will be the first to demand that the sink be fixed if it drips for more than 30 seconds.)
November 5th, 2007 at 2:04 pmBilly Hill - as someone who’s lived through a regime that tortured, the lowest form of defence is humour!
November 5th, 2007 at 2:23 pmWell, he hardly has a leg to stand on, does he?
November 5th, 2007 at 3:45 pmlooks like he’s describing Condi’s breast augmentation surgery.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:11 pmNot a cent to those who fail to stop the use of torture by the United States. Even if Mukasey is confirmed, this battle is not over. Join the Not a Cent movement. http://www.notacent.com
November 6th, 2007 at 12:33 am.
The semantic B.S. this Administration engages in has got to stop!
The law IS factual dip-shit!
One does not have to be in a car traveling faster than the posted speed limit to know that exceeding the speed limit is against the law!
.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:19 am>then it is hard to criticize others for the use of it.
of course it is. don’t you see they wont condemn others torturing americans because someday they may want to circumvent the constitution by shipping americans overseas to be tortured, exactly like they did to that innocent canadian guy? do you really think any of these suits think THEY are going to be the americans that get captured? heck no!
mark my words, the people most likely to be directly responsible for the torture of american’s being tortured overseas is the american government itself. if the supreme court does not address it, it will be the perfect way to circumvent constitutional rights.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:51 amGod damn the Bush administration is evil.
The US is the bad guy now.
How disgusting, despicable, and embarrassing.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:58 pm