Retired Judge Advocates General Write To Leahy: "IT IS INHUMANE-IT IS TORTURE & IT IS ILLEGAL"

[kpete]

Retired Judge Advocates General Write To Leahy Condemning Waterboarding
November 2, 2007

The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman United States Senate Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Leahy,

In the course of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of President Bush’s nominee for the post of Attorney General, there has been much discussion, but little clarity, about the legality of “waterboarding” under United States and international law. We write because this issue above all demands clarity: Waterboarding is inhumane, it is torture, and it is illegal.

In 2006 the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on the authority to prosecute terrorists under the war crimes provisions of Title 18 of the U.S. Code. In connection with those hearings the sitting Judge Advocates General of the military services were asked to submit written responses to a series of questions regarding “the use of a wet towel and dripping water to induce the misperception of drowning (i.e., waterboarding) . . .” Major General Scott Black, U.S. Army Judge Advocate General, Major General Jack Rives, U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General, Rear Admiral Bruce MacDonald, U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General, and Brigadier Gen. Kevin Sandkuhler, Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, unanimously and unambiguously agreed that such conduct is inhumane and illegal and would constitute a violation of international law, to include Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

We agree with our active duty colleagues. This is a critically important issue - but it is not, and never has been, a complex issue, and even to suggest otherwise does a terrible disservice to this nation. All U.S. Government agencies and personnel, and not just America’s military forces, must abide by both the spirit and letter of the controlling provisions of international law. Cruelty and torture - no less than wanton killing - is neither justified nor legal in any circumstance. It is essential to be clear, specific and unambiguous about this fact - as in fact we have been throughout America’s history, at least until the last few years. Abu Ghraib and other notorious examples of detainee abuse have been the product, at least in part, of a self-serving and destructive disregard for the well- established legal principles applicable to this issue. This must end.

The Rule of Law is fundamental to our existence as a civilized nation. The Rule of Law is not a goal which we merely aspire to achieve; it is the floor below which we must not sink. For the Rule of Law to function effectively, however, it must provide actual rules that can be followed. In this instance, the relevant rule - the law - has long been clear: Waterboarding detainees amounts to illegal torture in all circumstances. To suggest otherwise - or even to give credence to such a suggestion - represents both an affront to the law and to the core values of our nation.

We respectfully urge you to consider these principles in connection with the nomination of Judge Mukasey.

Sincerely,

Rear Admiral Donald J. Guter, United States Navy (Ret.) Judge Advocate General of the Navy, 2000-02

Rear Admiral John D. Hutson, United States Navy (Ret.) Judge Advocate General of the Navy, 1997-2000

Major General John L. Fugh, United States Army (Ret.) Judge Advocate General of the Army, 1991-93

Brigadier General David M. Brahms, United States Marine Corps (Ret.) Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant, 1985-88

http://thinkprogress.org/jag-letter-waterboarding/

[flashl]

1. There they go again, the JAGs, making sense. n/t

[gratuitous]

2. Leahy's not the problem

It's Schumer, Feinstein and the Republicans who need the education on torture. As reprehensible as Mukasey's sophistry is, for this man to come out of committee with a majority endorsement is an even heavier condemnation of the Senate. I have to say that I don't understand how the Democrats, as often as they've had this administration lie in their faces, still grants them so much credibility and deference.

[rockybelt]

26. Leahy

No, he's not the problem. However, he can stop this nomination from coming to a vote. That is what he needs to do until all the negative feedback gets to congress. Maybe it will sink into their corporate owned skulls that "We the People" are their true bosses.

[EFerrari]

29. He's not the problem and now he can wave this letter should

he need to.

[magellan]

3. Bless the JAGs, but I'll still go for the simpler tack

If waterboarding isn't torture, Bush** and Cheney should be willing to have themselves subjected to it, on national tv. Live. With Pelosi administering the water.

It'd be so easy for them to prove they're right and we're wrong.

I'd be very happy to watch that.

If they won't do it, it's obvious why.

[bdamomma]

43. no, Nancy is too busy praying for the President.

:sarcasm:

[cali]

4. Don't they realize that Leahy has stated unequivocally

on many occasions that waterboarding IS torture? He's said it for years now. And Leahy has spoken out against all torture for over 25 years.

[DCKit]

20. They're simply providing ammunition to a comrade. nt

[peacetalksforall]

5. The equivalent of Dems voting for waterboarding torture is to negate

any protests against torture since the Inquisition. What a history will be written about this country - if that gets through the Dems, we are over as a country of any good will. I was lucky to go to a number of countries while Americans were still welcome. Now, what the heck to we lead in? NOTHING - except for the hardworking, law fulfilling, little people who want peace, some prosperity, and a protected future for their children.

Is this the lowest point in our lives? Or will it be when Blackwater leads us into the prisons?

[Krashkopf]

6. Makes me PROUD to be a former JAG!

The JAG Corp, which was established in 1775, has a long distinguished history of standing up TO the Military's civilian leadership, and FOR the CONSTITUTION!

This letter makes me DAMNED PROUD to be a former Army JAG!

Krash

[cali]

8. I commend you, and those writing the letter

but seeing as Leahy is undoubtedly one of the strongest anti-torture advocates in Congress, I'm perplexed as to why Hutson and the other JAGs directed this letter to him. I can't imagine they're not aware of his work and words on this issue.

[Solly Mack]

11. But that's exactly why they wrote to Leahy, cali

They know he'll listen. People demand more of Leahy because he does speak out against torture. That's not an attack - it's a compliment.

People don't ask anything of those who support torture - what would be the point? They won't listen anyway.

[cali]

16. that makes little sense

why try and convince someone who's spoken out as strongly as they are for many years about something he's long been ahead of? Why not try and persuade those who need persuading? There are people in between, who might listen, and who certainly need to hear this.

[Amonester]

35. After all these last 7 years of those who need persuading not listening

to any persuation attempt, there obviously is no hope left of persuading tbem of anything other than the following: the only way to persuade these corrupt entities is to read them their Miranda rights once and for all.

[cali]

38. that's just absurd.

Senators and Reps cannot read anyone Miranda Rights. Period.

[Amonester]

45. Sorry. I thought it was obvious I was 'speaking figuratively' - n/t

[Spazito]

15. It is a courtesy to the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee

as opposed to singling out Senator Leahy on a personal level. They may well have sent their letter to each of the Committee members or expect Senator Leahy, as chair, to circulate their letter to each member of the the Committee, imo.

[cali]

19. umm, maybe. But why not

say, "As someone who has long worked against torture, and against its use by any branch of our government...."?

[Spazito]

22. I can only speculate as I didn't participate in the writing of the letter...

but if one is wanting their letter on a serious issue to be circulated to others, you write your letter in a manner that doesn't personalize it and, instead, focuses on the issue itself so anyone receiving the copy isn't thinking the contents are only for the original recipient and, therefore, doesn't apply to them.

[Gregorian]

12. Please post here more often.

That's an order! :)

We need your voice. Otherwise you'll get my voice, which is often a high shrill.

And thank you.

[Nostradammit]

32. Welcome to DU

I'm sincerely glad you're here.

[blondie58]

33. welcome to DU, Krash!

[cali]

7. Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy: Torture is a crime.

March 13, 2003

Mr. President, I want to take a moment today to speak about an issue that has been discussed in the press recently, which is the use of torture to obtain information from persons who are suspected of being terrorists.

It has been pointed out that torture is not only a violation of international law, which our country is bound by, but also a violation of United States law. And yet, several commentators have been quoted by the press saying that in certain limited circumstances, when the threat is a possible terrorist attack that could mean the loss of hundreds or thousands of innocent lives, the use of torture is justified. Some have even suggested that since torture is used, why not simply admit it and accept it as a fact of life.

These are difficult questions with no simple answers. Who would not want to do everything possible to save innocent lives? We all would. But the United States is a nation of laws, and I categorically reject the view that torture, even in such compelling circumstances, can be justified. I would hope that all countries would uphold their obligations under international law, but of course that is not the case. It is the 21st Century, and yet torture is used by government security forces in some 150 countries.

Mr. President, we often speak of how important it is that we not let the terrorists win. We try not to let ourselves be intimidated. We take precautions, but we go about our daily lives.

The same holds true of the tactics terrorists use. If we do not protect the civil liberties that distinguish us from terrorists, the terrorists have also won. Torture is among the most heinous crimes, and there is no justification, in law or otherwise, for its use.

<snip>

[WinkyDink]

24. He needed to state clearly that waterboarding is torture, not merely that "torture is a crime"---

with which definition Bush agreed!

[cali]

36. uh, he did.

he said no american should need to be briefed to know that waterboarding is torture, but whatever.

[Solly Mack]

9. Yes!!! Yes!!! Yes!!!

[cali]

14. heh.

"No American should need a classified briefing to determine that waterboardin is torture." Senator Leahy.

And:

Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy: Torture is a crime.
March 13, 2003

Mr. President, I want to take a moment today to speak about an issue that has been discussed in the press recently, which is the use of torture to obtain information from persons who are suspected of being terrorists.

It has been pointed out that torture is not only a violation of international law, which our country is bound by, but also a violation of United States law. And yet, several commentators have been quoted by the press saying that in certain limited circumstances, when the threat is a possible terrorist attack that could mean the loss of hundreds or thousands of innocent lives, the use of torture is justified. Some have even suggested that since torture is used, why not simply admit it and accept it as a fact of life.

These are difficult questions with no simple answers. Who would not want to do everything possible to save innocent lives? We all would. But the United States is a nation of laws, and I categorically reject the view that torture, even in such compelling circumstances, can be justified. I would hope that all countries would uphold their obligations under international law, but of course that is not the case. It is the 21st Century, and yet torture is used by government security forces in some 150 countries.

Mr. President, we often speak of how important it is that we not let the terrorists win. We try not to let ourselves be intimidated. We take precautions, but we go about our daily lives.

The same holds true of the tactics terrorists use. If we do not protect the civil liberties that distinguish us from terrorists, the terrorists have also won. Torture is among the most heinous crimes, and there is no justification, in law or otherwise, for its use.

<snip>

Ready to say Yes!! Yes!! Yes!! to Leahy's statements. I've got lots more where those came from.

[Solly Mack]

18. You still don't get it do you?

That's really sad. You're so afraid someone is attacking Leahy that you can't tell the difference between demanding even more from someone you know is against torture and an attack.

and FYI, I have the 2003 statement in my favorites in the folder labeled Torture 2003 and then more recent comment in the folder marked Mukasey.

[cali]

21. glad to hear that you recognize

that Leahy is in the forefront of this fight. And yes, I'm sick of people here at DU attacking Leahy for things he has no control over and that's not about fear. It's about righteous indignation.

And truly, this letter should have been sent to those who need these things explained. It's fine to send it to Leahy if it's also addressed to those who don't get the importance of standing against torture and anyone who won't unequivocally repudiate it.

[malaise]

10. Bravo JAGS

Expose these chicken hawks.

[cali]

13. Leahy on Waterboarding:

"No American should need a classified briefing to determine whether waterboarding is torture," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont.

[malaise]

30. Leahy's statement was fabulous

No surprise.

[Terri S]

17. This needs to be read into the official record when the confirmation vote happens.

This way every single one of those who vote for his confirmation is on record supporting a proponent of torture.

[babylonsister]

23. I hope they cc:ed Schumer and Feinstein. nt

[williesgirl]

25. There are still honorable men in this country. rec'd

[defendandprotect]

42. Yes, but violence continues to provide that they are sidelined by the violent among us ---

[Elspeth]

27. Kick

:kick:

[EFerrari]

28. K&R and THANK YOU!

[Nostradammit]

31. Thank You Gentlemen!!!

This is wonderful to read!



Hey Diane, you getting any of this? Are you, Chuck?

[spanone]

34. they should send it to schumer and feinstein.

[Amonester]

37. schumer and feinstein R not listening

(or, in this tragic case, not reading)

[Hubert Flottz]

39. I couldn't agree more...

Without the rule of law we are no better than the Nazis.

[bdamomma]

44. ......

we are getting close to it.

[Fiendish Thingy]

40. Unfortunately, these judges are wrong- waterboarding is no longer illegal.

According to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the President has the ultimate authority to define/decide/determine what is torture, and what is a legal "technique". That is why Mukasey cannot state unequivocally that waterboarding is torture, is illegal, because he hasn't been "briefed" on the decider's definition of torture. If Mukasey were to tell the undistorted truth, he would have to say that, legally speaking, at this moment, waterboarding was not torture, and was perfectly legal, because Bush says so. That would not only reveal to all America Bush's role in the US policy of torture, but also Congress's compllicity in enabling Bush's reign of terror...the illegality and unconstitutionality of this whole mess would subject everyone involved to scrutiny for impeachment and war crimes trials, including Democrats who voted for the MCA.

In a moral and historical context, the Judges are, of course, 100% correct.

[defendandprotect]

41. What we should ask is how we are continually controlled by the few violent among us . . ..

rather than the old question of how we are controlled by the few . . .

Because VIOLENCE is the main weapon of the patriarchy ---
and if we want to dismantle this dictatorship, we must fight all violence --
we must stop all violence.

[Swamp Rat]

46. kick