Sun editorial:

A tortured policy

Congress should form an independent commission to study Bush administration’s actions

Friday, May 1, 2009 | 2:07 a.m.

In Congress there has been a roaring debate recently over the so-called torture memos from the Justice Department, outlining the brutal tactics used by CIA interrogators after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The Bush administration pushed those policies into place and has since defended them — most recently by former Vice President Dick Cheney — as vital and lifesaving. The consensus, however, is that those techniques are torture, and President Barack Obama ordered the CIA to stop using them.

There have been calls in Congress to prosecute those who employed and authorized those tactics. Obama has said CIA agents who used the torture techniques should not be prosecuted. He has, however, stopped short of coming out against prosecuting the attorneys and officials who authorized the tactics.

Federal appeals Judge Jay Bybee, who is based in Las Vegas, signed the legal opinion authorizing torture techniques, and some members of Congress have called for his resignation or impeachment. Bybee sent a statement this week to The New York Times defending the opinion, which has been roundly criticized by scholars and law professors, as “a good-faith analysis of the law.”

Congress has been divided, mostly along partisan lines, about what to do. Some people, particularly Republicans, have called for letting the matter drop. They say the “enhanced interrogation techniques” yielded great results and prevented attacks. Their support comes from CIA memos that claim planned terrorist attacks, including one on Los Angeles, were stopped after interrogators learned of the plans by using the techniques. In other words, the ends justified the means.

Other people, particularly Democrats, argue there is little — if any — evidence that waterboarding and other torture techniques provided results. They point to interviews with former interrogators, who cast doubt on their effectiveness. The CIA never conducted any serious study of the tactics’ alleged success, even after the agency’s inspector general reported in 2004 that there was no evidence to prove the brutal techniques stopped any “specific credible threats.”

There is too much at stake — particularly the nation’s reputation and its valued record on human rights — to let this issue be caught in partisan wrangling.

Congress should convene a bipartisan, independent commission — with full subpoena power — to investigate the Bush administration’s torture policy. Before moving ahead, the nation deserves a full accounting of the facts.

Discussion: 6 comments so far…

By fremmasmind

5/1/09 at 4:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Let's start at the begining, Congress should reinvestigate the events that took place before, and during 9-11. This was the starting point of all the corruption which took place during the Bush Administration.
By Houstonjac

5/1/09 at 8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Las Vegas Sun--Taking you to task here for using words "brutal" and "torture". Shows your liberal leaning predudice. These are relative concepts--do you mean that anything other than talking in a gentle voice to these murdering thugs is brutal and torture? Were we brutal and torturous compared to what these insurgents did to our troops and civilians( you know, beheading them). Were these acts brutal and tortuous compared to medieval torture techniques. Or are you using the Geneva Convention definition of torture( which does not apply here to plain clothed enemy combatants.) You throw around the terms "brutal" and "torture" like they were scientifically tested elements in the universe, which they are not. The terms take on meaning by the context in which the actions existed. This certainly must be the basis for any legal assessment of the use of these terms.
By KillerB

5/1/09 at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sun -- Amen! To propose otherwise is to say the Bush Regime criminals are above the law.

No one is above the law.

I'd like to see you put the screws to Bybee. For his part in that bit of treason he should at least be removed from teaching doublethink to a new crop of bar members.
By Houstonjac

5/1/09 at 10:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is in reaction to the Las Vegas Sun's editorial in the May 1, 2009 edition titled A Tortured Policy. I am taking you to task here for using the words "brutal" and "torture"subjectively,and out of context. The editorial shows your liberal leaning prejudice in the matter. These terms are relative concepts--do you mean that anything other than talking in a gentle voice to murdering thugs is "brutal" and "torture"? Were we brutal and torturous compared to what the insurgents did to our troops and civilians ( you know, beheading them). Were these acts brutal and tortuous compared to medieval torture techniques. Or are you using the Geneva Convention definition of prisoner treatment policy ( which does not apply here to plain clothed enemy combatants.) You use the terms "brutal" and "torture" like they were scientifically tested elements in the universe, which they are not. The terms take on meaning by the legal context in which the actions existed. This certainly must be the basis for any legal assessments and arguments concerning the application of these terms.

Unless there be compelling evidence to support the fact that laws in existence were clearly violated, this entire matter should be dropped. We should not engage in any witch hunts to satisfy the political whims and motivations of liberals. Clearly, everyone involved from Jay Bybee to the President, and even Pelosi, must be presumed innocent until and unless they be convicted by a jury of their peers. If the United States can make a case for indicting and prosecuting anyone for breaking any specific laws in connection with this matter, then let them come forward and do so. If they cannot then drop this matter and move on!
By GHM

5/1/09 at 11:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Torture is terrible and unlawfull!
Off with their heads - no torture there.
PS what was done is murder, and brutal and torture.
Absolutely put them in prison with the people he had in guantanamo, including Bush & Cheney.
By Future

5/1/09 at 3:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

What about the Clinton activities where he sent them to send terrorist to foreign countries.

- Clinton/ Panetta were the initiator of the program of rendition to send captured terrorist to countries that torture.
- The CIA watchdog report, completed in June 2005 and kept classified until 2007, indicates that the CIA's analysis of Al Qaeda before Sept. 2001 was lacking.
- Today even Clinton's freewheeling FISA foreign intelligence Echelon data gold mining of the late 90's is under attack (Echelon http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/0.........)

He will go back to his days with Sandy Berger, Richard Clark, Tony Lake and continue their efforts to reduce the spooks on the ground in foreign counties and kill FISA. Will he hire Valerie Elise Plame Wilson, Joseph C.Wilson, or Thomas Tamm
Panetta has been quoted as saying that terrorist should not experience any "discomfort" when being questioned. That means no music, temperature swing, intense or prolonged questioning, isolation, etc.