The new opinion, the officials said, for the first time provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning, and frigid temperatures.

Gonzales approved the legal memorandum on "combined effects" over the objections of James B. Comey, the deputy attorney general, who was leaving his job after bruising clashes with the White House. Disagreeing with what he viewed as the opinion's overreaching legal reasoning, Comey told colleagues at the department that they would all be "ashamed" when the world eventually learned of it.

...

A White House spokesman, Tony Fratto, said yesterday that he would not comment on any legal opinion related to interrogations. Fratto added, "We have gone to great lengths, including statutory efforts and the recent executive order, to make it clear that the intelligence community and our practices fall within US law" and international agreements.

...

Associates at the Justice Department said Gonzales seldom resisted pressure from Vice President Dick Cheney and David S. Addington, Cheney's counsel, to endorse policies they saw as effective in safeguarding Americans, even though the practices brought the condemnation of other governments, human rights groups and Democrats in Congress.


From the [link|http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/10/04/secret_opinions_okd_harsh_interrogation_tactics/|Boston Globe] 

Trust us, the administration says, the techniques are legal and effective even though the Pentagon learned that you get better results without terror and intimidation:

Or listen to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 -- long before Abu Ghraib -- to assess interrogations in Iraq. Aside from its immorality and its illegality, says Herrington, torture is simply "not a good way to get information." In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the "batting average" might be lower: "perhaps six out of ten." And if you beat up the remaining four? "They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop."


From the [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2302-2005Jan11.html|The Torture Myth at WaPo]