I also saw on the Rachel Maddow show that they possibly tortured EVEN BEFORE they legally wrote up the enhanced interrogation techniques and that the guy interogating had to get permission every time he did use it and he got permission from Alberto Gonzales and Gonzalez was not in the justice dept then, only president bush's personal attorney.
If this also turns out to be true, then HOUSTON we've got a problem.
Care, how can you make something legal that isn't legal? That's a scary thing if you believe our government is justified in claiming any action is legal.
you can't make something legal that was not legal....but for some reason, the administration thought they could 'get around' it....
I don't expect a CIA contractor hired to use enhanced interrogation techniques to know the finite law....on the Rachel Maddow show, they said that this contractor could not get info from his interrogations and he kept having to reach the whitehouse, his instructions were to contact alberto gonzalez to get permission to go farther and farther with harsher techniques...
The problem, they said on Rachel's show, is that Alberto gonzalez was just the white house council to the president, not Ashcroft, the attorney general....who would have been the appropriate way to go, on permission, but just Gonzalez...the president's right hand man....(so the president was WELL AWARE that we were using torture and it was at the president's DIRECT KNOWLEDGE AND APPROVAL, while he was telling all of us, that "we do not torture"....)
And the second problem for the administration that I see, if what was said on this program is true, is that we were using these torturous techniques, LONG before Congress was made aware of them and LONG before the lawyers all got together and worked their supposed magic, to explain away their legality....
In other words, they wrote the legal explanation of saying waterboarding was not torture, AFTER they had already done it, to try to cover their asses for doing it.
care
