Thursday
Feb142008
House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee hearing on the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel
Acting Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, said there is a specific definition as to what is torture. Torture, he said, is when severe mental or physical suffering causes prolonged mental harm. He said the physiological sensation of the "gag" or "drowning" reaction is what makes the technique acute, even though you know you're not going to drown.
There are new statutes in the War Crimes Act, Bradbury said, that took the definition of torture and changed it. The new statutes became effective Fall 2006, and the department has not analyzed the practice of waterboarding under that new statute. He also said he is not aware of any deaths resulting from being waterboarded.
During questioning about the destroyed CIA tapes, Bradbury said he was not involved in the discussion nor did he have personal knowledge about it, and when asked who may have destroyed them he said, "I don't know." Although he was repeatedly asked the same question in various different ways, he kept saying "I don't know."
Representative Melvin Watt (D-NC) asked if the president had the authority to "disregard" the legality of waterboarding, and under Article II of the Constitution, would he be able to order waterboarding to be done. Bradbury would not directly answer the question, instead saying that the president would not do that even with the power to do so. Watt repeated the question six times, and emphasized that he did not want to know if the president "would" do it, the question was if the president "could" step over the law under Article II. Bradbury never answered that question.
There are new statutes in the War Crimes Act, Bradbury said, that took the definition of torture and changed it. The new statutes became effective Fall 2006, and the department has not analyzed the practice of waterboarding under that new statute. He also said he is not aware of any deaths resulting from being waterboarded.
During questioning about the destroyed CIA tapes, Bradbury said he was not involved in the discussion nor did he have personal knowledge about it, and when asked who may have destroyed them he said, "I don't know." Although he was repeatedly asked the same question in various different ways, he kept saying "I don't know."
Representative Melvin Watt (D-NC) asked if the president had the authority to "disregard" the legality of waterboarding, and under Article II of the Constitution, would he be able to order waterboarding to be done. Bradbury would not directly answer the question, instead saying that the president would not do that even with the power to do so. Watt repeated the question six times, and emphasized that he did not want to know if the president "would" do it, the question was if the president "could" step over the law under Article II. Bradbury never answered that question.
Reader Comments