Between March and December of 2003, enemies abroad did not have rights or protections from cruel and unusual punishment that U.S. citizens have under the Constitution- meaning the 5th and 8th amendment need not apply.

This was revealed in a memo released by the Pentagon on Tuesday.

It’s a memo we’ve known existed for a while, but only now can we see some of the startling language used by John Yoo, former deputy assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Council.

“Our previous opinions make clear that customary international law is not federal law and that the president is free to override it at his discretion.” And later, “Finally, even if the criminal prohibitions outlined above applied, and an interrogation method might violate those prohibitions, necessity or self-defense could provide justifications for any criminal liability.”

The last bit protects any interrogator who was charged with violating U.S. laws. Asserted military operators essentially had free reign to interrogate. Actions came before authorization and the president, unbound by the Constitution, could have detainees on foreign soil assaulted and tortured.

The Associated Press said, “The memo also includes past legal defenses of interrogations that Yoo wrote are not considered torture, such as sleep deprivation, hooding detainees and “frog crouching,” which forces prisoners to crouch while standing on the tips of their toes.”

Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times asserts that the White House was “not pleased” when agency officials grew fearful of other critical elements, such as wiretapping, concerned they were participating in an illegal operation.

The memo was rescinded in 2003.

Thanks to an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit, the Bush administration was forced to turn over documents about the War on Terror.

However, there’s still a whole treasure trove of documents authorized by the CIA we still haven’t seen.

Lichblau says: “And they probably won’t be seen for a while.”