Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
What what you know it -- the phrase charger mammal I think I like to get to the idea -- what is torture.
You know as waterboarding torture -- do we really know what torturers.
-- to find.
Well the congress what it passed the law says.
Intentional infliction of severe.
Physical or mental pain or suffering.
And then that was pretty much it and so I agree waterboarding.
Is a difficult question there are some people who think it's torture there -- some people who don't.
One saying that you can see from the -- have been released now by the Obama administration is that.
It's part of this series.
The interrogation methods that we used to train our own soldiers.
But now that's but that's that was only used so that soldiers.
Who were trained in in -- so called torture techniques would know what to face should they ever be captured that's not the same thing is as using -- on our enemies.
But it that was done -- if you look at again if you look at dozens.
Do what we did was look at it any of those soldiers -- -- severe physical harm.
Or pain and suffering is the statute defines and it didn't appear that they have.
Psychologically is a very different environment when they know they're doing it as a training exercise.
-- when it's being done to somebody -- a captured enemy so psychologically it's a very different environment.
Well I think part of the you know looking at what the long term health effects on the soldiers were undergoing that kind.
Training as part of how you figure that out you know does.
Is that something we should be able do for example in the Geneva convention is -- true that you say Geneva convention was officially outdated.
And an obsolete.
And -- -- I don't think the Geneva conventions applied an annoyance they also -- attention the -- -- that ban on torture as a congressional criminal statutes.
And the Geneva conventions -- treaty.
And because of that you know our basic view is that the al-Qaeda terrorist network and they're not a nation they didn't find the Geneva conventions and they showed no.
Willingness took calls.
You've got the UN convention on torture you've got cruel unusual punishment -- got a different codes and I think that where it would apply and the idea that we would do that would violate about Geneva convention.
You'd think other treaties to which we signatory if not the -- US constitution.
The constitution is a separate question yeah -- right to point -- this -- many different laws.
That memos that you're talking about it on about the criminal statute there are other opinions from.
The Justice Department that talked about the Geneva conventions and why we didn't think those -- and you know for the purposes.
What the CIA wanted to know at that.
These will be -- Yes hello I'm Jim Clancy -- and -- -- I'm sorry about that billion it was a we you know we were talking what the act.
-- -- our agents in the field work as opposed to say what international law.
It's -- Prohibited -- part of that is because you -- -- try to be very careful in all these situations to.
Carefully commit to certain laws and not others because for example.
There were additional treaties that amended the Geneva conventions which gave terrorists for example.
Similar status to print.
But -- Jim disagreement neither in the whole other series of laws and treaties it's not decision even convention.
-- We tried not that we don't decide not to sign -- -- not take part this -- the United States other differently from our European allies did not when he -- terrorists.
This -- in those same rights because they don't follow so.
Well we have with us Jason we have the UN commission on torture layoffs and we have the US go to military just as you may I guess we can debate whether or not.
Those tenets apply is there anything the president can't do what where what are the limits of executive power can the president order.
Torture can the president -- whatever he wants or she want.
I don't think so and that's also part is that's the picture try to get is in crisis and command is that.
-- -- -- President's decisions have to be reasonably related to the purpose of the power so for example.
You know we're in a war -- in Iraq and Afghanistan President Obama McCain to achieve that doesn't mean you could say.
I can decree.
Universal health care or I can decree.
You know climate change -- As commander in chief in -- to -- decree as commander in chief the way.
Enemies are treated the way terrorists are true.
What -- traditionally presidents have used their commander in chief powers to define.
This status for the enemy and how they're to be treated that was something for example president Lincoln did immoral war -- -- in the civil war.
And president Roosevelt in world war two and they both decided for example.
To use military commissions -- military trials to try even US citizens.
Even in this treasurer congress tesnus statute.
And he got to the history nearby -- well -- -- short on time marijuana get this an -- -- asked about this before by the Notre Dame.
You in some people's -- in famously said that the president might be able to order the crushing of the testicles of a child to get the father.
I never said that I mean what was going on there.
People assemble what we did this or what have we do that said look you know I'm not answering all these.
You know outrageous hypotheticals on saying.
Is that the presence Comanche can make some decisions if congress disagrees with and they can stop and easily can cut off funding it could ultimately teach and ideally get in this game as saying a little what if we decided that had everybody or drop nuclear bombs on villages because people's imaginations -- run.
Wild and -- opinion poll in -- -- -- way when it comes to these matters.
Actually you don't believe the president could ever agree or -- prove anything close to that.
Doesn't yet because I let us thank you have to be reasonably necessary.
So why has the power I can't imagine that any president would ever think and I don't think any -- -- would ever think -- at least -- need to do anything.
Like I was at poorly stated perhaps when he answered a question.
No I think what happens is people -- -- things are only quote one sentence and don't finish quoting the rest of -- and I think if you look at the rest of what I said of that debate you exceed.
Haven't said anything.
Then that I wanted to thank you now the --
Filter by section