[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 156 (Tuesday, October 16, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Page S12931]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  AUTHORIZING INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my concern 
regarding the most recent revelations of administration memos 
effectively authorizing the use of interrogation techniques that most 
certainly rise to the level of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment 
or punishment, if not to the level of torture.
  In 2002, senior administration officials prepared a classified memo 
that sought to provide legal cover for interrogation practices that 
would clearly violate U.S. and international law. This ``torture memo'' 
was leaked to the press after the Abu Ghraib scandal broke and, in 
turn, caused such outrage that it was quickly disavowed by the Justice 
Department. A new, improved, and sanitized legal memo on interrogation 
norms was then issued in December 2004.
  It now appears, according to a report published by the New York Times 
on October 4, that the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel 
subsequently issued two additional legal memos that once again defined 
torture as ``not torture'' and--in an apparent effort to end run 
congressional efforts to close loopholes in the existing prohibition 
against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment--simply 
declared that no CIA interrogation practices violated that prohibition.
  I would also draw my colleagues' attention to a subsequent, highly 
troubling report published by the New York Times on October 11 stating 
that the Director of the CIA, Michael Hayden, has ordered an 
investigation of the inspector general, John L. Helgerson. The CIA 
inspector general is known to have undertaken critical examinations of 
CIA interrogation procedures.
  With these latest developments in mind, I would like to share three 
observations.
  First, the revelation that--even while the Abu Ghraib scandal was 
still being investigated--the administration was issuing additional 
secret memos authorizing abusive interrogation techniques, stands as 
the latest blow to the credibility of the United States as a global 
advocate for human rights and democracy. We simply cannot win hearts 
and minds around the globe if we are perceived to condone a violation 
of basic human rights, our own laws, and international law. As 
cochairman of the Helsinki Commission, I am painfully aware of the 
extent to which these policies have undermined our nation's reputation, 
and even our ability to build support for counterterrorism operations 
worldwide.
  Second, these revelations once again draw attention to this 
administration's breathtaking interpretation of the scope of executive 
power. In fact, the 2002 ``torture memo'' actually consisted of two 
parts. One part effectively sought to define torture as ``not 
torture.'' The second part addressed the authority of the President to 
authorize torture. In essence, that part of the memo described the 
Presidency--when the President is acting as Commander in Chief--as 
virtually unrestrained by the Congress, the Constitution, or the 
courts. The Justice Department's renunciation of the 2002 torture memo 
only appeared to renounce the first part of that memo.
  Accordingly, during the January 2005 confirmation hearing for 
Attorney General Gonzalez, he was repeatedly questioned regarding his 
views on the scope of Presidential authority--and he repeatedly 
stonewalled. His refusal to answer those questions, coupled with the 
President's signing statements attached to the 2005 Detainee Treatment 
Act and the 2006 Military Commissions Act and most recent revelations 
of additional torture memos, suggest that President Bush does believe 
himself to be beyond or above the law.
  Many retired military leaders have argued that abusive interrogation 
techniques undermine America's moral authority, fuel jihadist 
recruitment, and weaken international norms that have protected 
American service men and women for decades. Moreover, a now 
declassified report issued by the Government's Intelligence Science 
Board has concluded there is no scientific evidence that coercive 
interrogation methods even produces good intelligence. And we now know 
that the use of these techniques has, in actual cases, produced false 
or misleading intelligence.
  Sadly, the one of the greatest tragedies of the President's misguided 
policies on torture is this: this administration's justification of 
abusive techniques has not made us any safer.

                          ____________________