Security and a foreign law grad. Well be talking to him about his book. Rosenberg reporting in the u. S. And the day it opened january 11, 2002. Starting with miami and before that, reported from middle east and moved recently to the new york times. Shes one of many awards including Robert F Kennedy and part of the miami team that won the Pulitzer Prize in 2001. Let me tell me you the format. They will talk and then i will come back on and i will pose questions to the audience. If you have questions, feel free to put them in the chat or if you prefer the q and a and i will get to as many as i can. Without further ado. Take away. Think it much, thank you much. Ill talk about the book quickly. The story thats told, america gets this sucker punch pearl harbor in 1941. The pearl harbor attack galvanize and demoralize americans, they were angry, probably scared. Four months later, the wealthy pilots of the center of the story, the raiders, they dropped bombs on the military target and most of them to all the way to china and are allies in fdr is allowed to process this. Thats exactly right. That is in a nutshell. The story ive been covering in what seems like forever goes like this in 2001, 19 hijackers in a very cool sucker punch attack the World Trade Center pentagon and crash the plane into a pennsylvania field killing civilian to targets. Four months later, i watched the plane landed in guantanamo and dislodged 20 men in orange jumpsuits and when photos emerged, it seems to reassure americans that we got them. That is the set up. Both would be chi, questions about military justice and due process and reliability of evidence. My first question is, how do we discover this story . The second part ill the first. Exactly what you just said and how i found the story, i was working in the department of defense and the military commissions Defense Organization in 2007 when michael was nominated to the attorney general and the debate would rekindle. We heard a rumor about the case in which the u. S. Prosecuted the japanese waterboarding it seemed obviously relevant to the questions we confronted in 2007. They were to take out the reco record, which i dont think was seen in 60 years at that time. On one rainy day i finally cracked it up and read it and its the story you just described. Probably the most celebrated operation world war ii, the people who lived through world war ii. Story about torture and justice, revenge and i felt sitting at 2007, i was reading this episode from 1945, 1946 of with the u. S. Is prosecuting the japanese were doing all the things we were doing in the war on terrorism. I dont mean to be naive about it but its me in the chest. Its a sense of looking through 60 years of time and all of a sudden its where i was sitting in the moment. I didnt write it right away, theres just nothing in the back of my mind. All the work i did for a number years after that and then i decided in 2014, to try and make a book about and thats how it got to be today. For the people watching, ive been talking to michelle about for years with michelle. Since 2007. s clients included laura. One is gone, one is convicted and one is in capital defense. When i was talking to these other things, he would crash and have this weird secure episodes like world war ii, japanese, fire away. I always thought it was kind of particular. Then i read it and i got it and divided into three portions. The attack, they went on a bombing run, pearl harbor, the First Response on pearl harbor, most made it across japan china are allies. This is the way i read it. The captured pilots including waterboarding, their trial summaries, i hope im not doing as much. This is all like in the first three chapters. They said, the japanese said the doolittle raiders were working. In part three, the u. S. Wins the war maybe what you call victors justice, the american recovers this surviving area who were held in dreadful conditions. He takes you there United States the people on trial. Reason we are having this conversation now, i remember calling michelle and said what struck me about the book, written in the language of the military commission. Describe what happened 80 years ago. Seventyfive, 80 years ago. So lets talk about that language. Okay. You saw people, who are they . I think i called them the highest but that was a deliberate language. Im not being coy and they were the raiders he described the rate accurately in the terms of the american perception which is, i never made that connection the way you just did. Four months go by in america shows it can fight back. Making america feel better. Rights. The doolittle raid at no significance. Have far more for the japanese and its precisely because one of the things i tried to do the book for reasons we can get into but i just became fascinated by was the perspective of the japanese on the raiders and as much as they are to strike back, to show here in this, the rate was 9 11. Its the first time in recorded history that japan is ever successful attacked from abroad. Immeately this moment of fear, unceainty, biggest basic assumption of japanese life abundant all at once. A profound sense of vulnerability and outrage. We can talk sort of about how the japanese characterized these attacks but they called it a terror raid. They focus on the bombing of the mitsubishi plan for oil tanks, they focus on the civilians. To them, is a great atrocity. They called it an act of terrorism. For them, when they captured the raiders, they had essentially their own, almost four months later, theres like a symmetry to all of us. They captured them and tortured them and there is a debate about socially what to do with them, it exposes all of the challenges we face in the immediate aftermath after 9 11. To what extent do we act on revenge . We act on the ability to show our power over prisoners versus our ideals . One of the things that surprised me probably because i was not in japan while working on this book, japan seems like, they prohibited torture at the end of the 19th century and as part of this massive liberal pollution in their own thinking so when this raid happens, they revert to the same forms of brutality for almost exactly the same reasons and excuses that we did they claim to hold just as dear as we did that to me was incredibly propelling parallel. Its important to understand the doolittle raid is our 9 11. They are the first. The first prisoners of the japanese by any stretch of the administration. They are the first people that the japanese themselves, the japanese population is about who these people are. The philippines was singapore, these are the people who perpetrated the attacks against us that has this turning. In our own sense of national vulnerability. City became really the highest level of the japanese governme government. They were a political issue because they had such high val value. Age 22, you fall into aggregations, can you described what happened a little later . I do describe it. These are somewhat coy word choices, it is not the war on terrorism, dont throw these parallels off of that. Youre the first person to unpack all that, i am sure that it did language in parts of the book precisely to cause them to reflect upon the parallels that i was seeing. The torture and interrogation the japanese subjected them to was waterboarding, as you mentioned but also deprivation, stress positions, and solitary confinement and other forms of incredible brutality that will readily familiar to of the United States was responsible for doing in the immediate aftermath. I think it was poignant to me is what i talked about when i read this in 2007 is i grew up in pennsylvania, my grandfather never drove a japanese car so to see the United States behaving as the Imperial Japanese was such a jarring moment thinking about what road the country had gone down. When you get to the precise methods of torture reflected back in modern day, it was stunning. Im not suggesting this was an open way but it is the language of today and that is how we talk about so when i read it in people who have worked on this issue read, i think they see that. Other people, i imagine, read it and dont even recognize that some of the language. I think that is probably true. Most of my readers to see a traditional world war ii story and that was my intent. I didnt want to make it. And its not. I wanted to wrestle with the ambiguities that ive wrestled with in my career dealing with these issues in a way i find there are two kinds of history that are very popular. One is the fairytale history which we are all quite familiar with. Look at the michael bay movie and you will see that but theres also other history where everything in the u. S. Does, it is jus expose kind of history is becoming exposed. I find both of them kind of naive and naive in our own time as well to look at these issues with this second right understanding. Good people do bad things they do it for good or at least understandable reasons. Bad people do good things. This book was an opportunity to wrestle with a lot of the. The distance at least of not having to think about the contemporary issues we are dealing with, thinking about it as history. Work on cases involving people being tortured. Some of this sounds like its on the senate report. It is not ripped from the senate. This book, one thing i will highlight for readers of this book has 1700 footnotes, actually little more. Its sort of the narrative, the language. Again, of course, these are so well talked about the language choice i made. I did this throughout the book. I used modern language, beijing, readers are going to get confused if i use all this but one place where had to think about that carefully was not the current phrase used. It was the water tear, thats typically how it was mentioned. Water tear was probably the most common, waterboarding doesnt come until about the september 11. So choosing to use the word waterboarding was conscious choice, it is the same thing. We shouldnt get los in our own euphemisms but they dont exist so i did do that deliberately. I did it because i didnt want to mislead the reader, i wanted to make what was being talked about as clear as possible. We tend to use that language, it is just lost on the reader. For the same reason, the 1940s had a lot of casual racism in it. The word job comes out of everybodys mouth without thinking about it. I kind of made a conscious choice to restrain my use of quotations in which it was included because it is extremely jaed. You make judgments about people using that i think are misleading. There is and there is an uncomfortable used in the book. There is an they were deliberate choices. I did choose one which very carefully because i wanted to convey the reality. I wanted people to enjoy what they were reading certain language choices, there are one or two uses of that word in the book but they are specific choices because i thought in those moments using that word was necessary to convey things like alienation, this sense of alienation and racial dynamic but using that word in every way i could have, i think it will bring you to those moments and its also meaning Something Different today. Who were the criminals in this . That is a great question. There are two morerimes in this. One is a war crimes trial the japanese conducted, which is a show trial. The whole thing lasted about an hour. Everyone gets the Death Penalty so the japanese accused them convicted them and executed th them. The second part of the story is the United States, the japanese who conducted the trial and accused them of being war criminals for simply conducting an unfair trial so what you have in 1946, a trial of a trial so who are the war criminals . I want that question to hang over the book for simple reason. Its one of the efforts i tried to hopefully successfully not reseed as a failure tell fairytale, get a perspective of all the people involved you could wrestle with these questions in the same way i have over the past 15 years. These are hard questions and anyone who says they are not hard questions, i not think torture is a hard question but when it is the responsibility to be able to claim that you are a victim, these are incredibly broad questions and they are difficult and they should be because they are real questions, not fairytale questions. What are legitimate, maybe eagle targets . The law was pretty influx of the time so its not like you d, there were efforts to create treaties about Aerial Combat but they never got off the ground. This is not true in the united kingdom, they had an aggressive view, the more people you kill, the better. The japanese took that the u. S. Address this quite aggressively. There is a deliberate policy ingrained in u. S. Army air force officers throughout the 30s and 40s that only military targets, targets that are essentially directly military in nature are legitimate. Collateral damages can be accepted but we dont delivery tried to kill as many people as possible. Try to break the war planners quality industrial, the means by which the enemy is. The changes over the course of the war. Never explicitly, which is an interesting story but by 1945 with the Bombing Campaign against japan, the two atomic bombings, at a minimum, tolerance for civilian casualties goes extremely high and the pretext of targeting military targets become more pretextual even in the bombing and i will sake, theres a debate about it targeting his military school. That is what we are only. 1941 42, the u. S. Took the targeting of military target very seriously at least on paper and in doctor. Before i go on too long of a range, the one piece of evidence i have is a target collection. The pilots got together to draw rds who got to do it. He said we are not calling them, not the military target and moreov, we dont want to get the japanese cause to give them an opportunity to rally around the leader. Doesnt do little also, if i rememb correctly, remember that or recognize in england, people are rallying around royalty and hes very strategic in that regard . Well, we dont want to. Thats exactly right. One of his major express rationales was it was pretty effective at demoralizing the British Population until the germans hit Buckingham Palace and creates an opportunity for everyone to rally around the flag and say if the king can take it, so can we. Jimmy explicitly said the emperor is completely offlimits. We dont want to do japanese any opportunity to rally around anyone that was expressive of u. S. Policy in 1942. Can i switch, were these trials open . The japanese trial was not. Was anyone there for that . Japanese soldiers were allowed to come and apparently it was quite a show. The trial itself was held in secret the fact that so many were allowed, this was not in the book but it was contention in the army send word the child must be held in secret. Where are you letting them watch . It is supposed to be a secret trial. Theres a big pride in policy, these trials that took place in the city and europe engage in this closed session, will have secret evince presented in secret and have them in public, they were keen to keep their and involved because press coverage was important in terms of relating the facts being in this transparency measure. So transparency, it was really important value in the military trials after world war ii. The war being over so this is one of the things were guantanamo, the argument that the work is ongoing and therefore, there needs to be levels. It struck me that the american tribunal is done afterwards were there capes . There were. I tried so hard to find these because the trial was broadcast on radio everyday, live. After looking for every potential archive, they just dont exist anymore. The raiders were heroes, right . Absolutely. If they did an american memory today with these atomic bombings in these major events that had far more lasting significance in the Second World War but the raiders were unquestionably the most celebrated important heroic figures you could name. There were two movies made about the raid during the raid. Hollywood generate two blockbuster films including one that kind of imagined the lost raiders. Getting a purple hea while the war is ongoing. This is right at the front and this is an interesting part at least for some lawyers but the doolittle raiders, in 1942, the japanese prosecute them and execute three of them. Unbeknownst to any of them but the japanese publicly announced they punished them. They made it into some broadcasting in the u. S. And when the fate of the raiders was revealed, it was assumed they were all killed and it set off a wave of public anger and blood loss like you havent seen since pearl harbor. 1943 and you have members of congress actively calling the u. S. To no longer japanese prisoners to primarily execute all the japanese they come into contact with and revenge to what happened with the raiders. Roosevelt is credited and the War Department in front of this quickly and said no, we agree to comply, it is part of the values we are fighting for as a count country. We cannot be seen as behaving essentially as directly as japanese and away blanketing or drawing a line that ends up being historically quite important. Piles are needed, who will find the japanese who participated and hold them personally as possible so it is the first real time you have them seriously promising the public that criminality will be punished and it becomes essentially satiating the publics desire they would only hold those people who are actually responsible, responsible. That ends up becoming over the resistance, really of soviets and the british, it becomes allied policy over the war so that by the end of the war, war crimes trials in the largescale for individual trials like the one i read about here are now a firm part of american ally glossy in general. The raiders were dealing with the public desire for revenge and justice for them so at least one of the neighbor drivers of the public opinion. The wars over and americans decide they will with those people that call in justice, justice on trial, what if a prosecutor decides they need to find the mastermind . The language of the day was they needed to find those who participated in the problem the prosecutors face is, as you might expect, thousands of people, potentially. Whether or not it is those who torture them all the way up to the emperor, a personal involvement in so when this prosecutor, the main question he finds, the main problem is who is that . I need to have a person who is the focal. And why it matters. Why he was driven that way because it was in part because of hollywood. I mentioned the one movie, the purple heart that came out in 1944 and has a mastermind. It has an evil villain and even an evil mustache so there is a desire of who is that . Hollywood already set the expectation that there is a person one person is clearly the most responsible and it ultimately falls the lawyers to live up to hollywoods expectation, expectations of hollywood set in the public mind for how it should go. I think thats like today, you have this simplistic view of a lot of these things related to this and this desire to have a bill and make sure the villain is the one whose hung in the e end. It is true one of your clients is accused of being a mastermind. Thats right variously accused of being a mastermind for the bombing but so have about half a dozen other people and that was kind of a parallel i could see playing out in the development of the case, you want to be able to tell everyone this is the guy. You want to be able to say this is the guy. We got them. I think that to, as the book shows, theres an interesting parallelism or maybe the problem is that in their rush to find the guy, without a spoiler, the guy is a appearing at the trial in wayshat shocked and appalled everyone because they are so intent on satisfying public expectations before they die, that they are misled. In the Looking Glass world of this story, any airmans trial, is jimmy the mastermind . I guess so. I guess he would be considered the mastermind. Name comes up in the japanese judgment. He is the one they blame and came up with the plan but he escaped. They dont have him. Hes a bummer but makes it to the other end and becomes an american hero. Absolutely. The people of the japanese, one thing after the trial includes august 1942, a death sentence against them and so the question is, do we actually carry out the sentences . Is again this mastermind thinking and how they basically split the baby. We will commute sentences of all the supporting personnel and execute the pilots of the two planes, two crews to get captured. One of the main allegations against them was that they have street civilians and thats one of the major galvanizing aspects of the raid in the imagination, the evidence of children being gunned down in school, fisheen being gunned down on beaches, hospitals. So going after the gutters is kind of going after all of this supposedly was established in a one to two hour trial. Thats right. It is a show trial. One of the aspects of the trial is that they dont have, how it unfolds is, they have these eight guys in secret prisons, theyve gotten pretty much any intelligence they are going to get out of strategic intelligence, what americans military capabilities are but then theres this will fight over what to do with them. On one side, you have people like the foreign minister is a traditional japanese liberal said we didnt modify agree to comply with it in this work and we have to treat them as prisoners of war. It is important for the japanese as it is for the americans because there are japanese amount the world tens of thousands of japanese in the u. S. , we dont want to create reprisal, we had to set standards we are willing to live by. There are a lot of different hardliners in the book, the chief of staff of the army, as publicly and spectacularly as possible as a show of strength for the happenings publishing but also the americans, dont from japan against. This becomes one of the most violent debates in the japanese cabinet really since the start of the work and the Prime Minister told joe, like a john weiner figure. Politicians whose main job is to keep them from killing each other in the cabinet he goes to the ministry and says, we got to kill these guys. Is there a way we can do that legally the lawyers come back and say no, you cant. They forbid killingrisoners. They go back to the ministry and say no, you dont understand. We have to kill them. If we dont find a way to kill them, they will do it anyway and claim it wasnt accident but no one will buy that it will be my little problem some of the lawyers to is put pen to paper and say okay, if we try them as r criminals in military commissions law, they can send them to death but that is a problem because they dont have a law that authorizes it today passing and it goes back to claw makes it a crime to attack japanese and its called the enemy law of 1942. It has a broad re of evidence, clearly designed to convict these men as quickly as possible and thats what it does. They issued this in august 1942 and within a few weeks, they are all convicted and in october, three are executed and the rest are sentenced to life in prison under special treatment. One of the things that condemns these trials is that they created a l after the attack in these circumstances in fact, when we prosecute the janese lawyers, our main rget for prosecution in 1946 was in fact, it was the lawyers. The u. S. Punishes the lawyers are conducting an unfair trial the papwork of murder. The key elements that make up the charge are use of evidence by torture. They called the law itself an act o terrorism the fact that the law only applies to nonjapanese citizens violates the rules and that ultimately they prosecuted four. Perversion of justice. When you read that book, you feel its very familiar one of things he did in defen of eablished,he crime of mateal support not triable. That is exactly right. Materials for terrorism violates the laws, solicitation will the loss is a constraint on milita military, that was a contested position. So far, noefense attorney has gone any ground on t notion that you cant create a foreign population. Not yet. Th issue is still playing around. The courts have, i think white the equal protection argument for equal justice under law. The criticisms of these. It was one of the biggest criticisms. A violation of the golden rul what is interting to me, having tried to bri this back, failing not limit, theyve avoided to everaving to decide this issue. They always just different, but procedural issues but it is not appropriaty in. I think because it is wrong and they know it is wha it is such a challenging and politically, politically dangerous thing t do, essentiallyeclare the tradeommission which they are being proseted for the september 11 trials probably a fundamental crucible of american justice so they neveraid it doesnt apply, and never says its perfectly legal, this avoided like t plague, i think hoping somehow tt the issue will one day go away. The only thing iegret is we dont have a forum, for example the prosecutor, if they did, hed have a few things to say buthe prosecutions areot in any way speaking publicly so we find ourselves in this position having to present ts case. Ifhey ask, they will explain the prosecion position on why you can have a case that only prosecutes it. What is the awer . The government has avoid answering this, two and its come dow to basically two idea eas, i think one is thathey dont any enjoy any as a constitutional matter. An issue like that is in the circuit right now. The promise is that they are outside of the u. S. And not citizens. They are not people for the purposes of the constitution is the same case all these years and the usehe same argument on all of them so tts one even if they process them under the nstitution, the courts have to for to the legislative little branches in t determination for nationa security but they never after try to defend the military commission and im not in their heads but i would say me, it betrays a certain discomfort having to justifyn 2020, his termination. A literally separate segregating justice. Its something out of jim crow or the slavery. So to try to argue that its not only lawfu in these technical ways but completely justifiable in the right thing to do, hard for even those people. There 15 questions. Yes, i will s what we can do but i will start with nancy i think you answered one o her questionut i want you to aner a little more directly. If you consider making it more explicit, want, whenou are iting, not more minor but about this. Without giving too many spoilers away, one of the interesting parts in writing this book was seeing the defense counsel operate not just because ive been doing with those cases but they were in a far tougher position politically and rsonally than i was. The defense counsel was a pilot, a decorated pilot at that. One 100 ideological and he basically takes the case mainly because hes in love with the concierge in his hotel in shanghai and needs a reason to stay in shanghai. This was the only town so he takes it in for the worst reason that i assume thinking its going to b an open and shut case. They want to make it look as fair as possie but what he does and what really strikes me as a remarkable part in this book, he just cant live with himself dog that and he just grabs the case in his enemy who would have happily killed him but makes the decision, iwe it to them, its my duty to represent them and give them the trial i would want if ias captured and put into japanese hands a he essentially does at the cost, hes basically up pilot after this trial and does go to law sool many years later but commits to doing his job. I would look to this trial the american trial in 1946s the first fair trial postworld war i. One s the not the greatest momentor anyone. It was done with extremist in mindnd there was another trial conducted i shanghai involving lynching but the defense lawyers just came in and said look, were going to do our job and as a consequence, it ended up being a fair trial. They end up takingositions that in 1946 were shocking and for even suggesting that the u. S. Was capable of anything like that. I think our conversation got cut, this is an interesting story of human people, here we are and we finally get a mention of the interest in shanghai. Dont think youre going to read on wartime, its an interesting read we were talking about yesterday, most people dont s that because you hav toave time on the trial to understand that okay. Im going to bundle aouple. Did you interview any of them later or japanese oicials . Did the brutal treatment of the chinese in these trials . Ye i got to interview the copilotho at the time was 9109. He said they only died a year end a half ago. He is an increble man in america. After the raid, he ends up staying in china and flying missions over the himalayan mountains, Something Like a thd of our planes went down there so heas an incredible person from id love tos to him about all sorts of interesting things. I relate the book the authors note, he said why do you write another about the doolittle raid . I said i know, therere a lot of books out there. Hopefully i can tell the story in another way. He was super gentleman a it was great. The revenge against the chinese for the cooperation,ne of the things thatappens, 60 of his men make it to safety. One plane, five members end up in the soviet union causing, three a killed in various plane crashes butll the rest of the raters not only survived but they make i out of occupied china with the help of a numr of the chinese and one thing i write about in t book is japan was responsive to this, my numbingly stupid for one but brutal. There are certain estimates, you always have to be careful one way or another there are estimates sam 40000 chinese were killed in essentially, i dont know what you call it, terrorism operations of the raid sole purpose is to destroy every rfield to prevent the amerans from landing in china again. That included, i didnt get to meet the people who were involved but went to the cy a couple of hours west of shanghai and that was the raters rally. As a quebec where they were held upor a couple weeks and they now go there to make out and hide from their parents. The town itself, because it had been the base for the raters, it becomes brutal target for the army and bombs mercilessly for weeks and the airelds are destroyed, they impressed the chinese and slave members to rake up the airfields with pic axes and shovels which was a brutal kind of slave lab. Theres some evidence, compelling evidence that i researched it enough to give you a competent answer, they suggested chemica weapons to kill civilia. Theyrovoked this ruthless response against the chinese. His question that was raised, it interesting a lot of the relations did not come out in time for the tal. The americannderstanding of atrocities against the chine even in 1945, 46 were largely reservedo those revelations came out through scholarship that was done in the past 20 years. There is another scholar on th this, to. Is your book being translated in japanese and published. I hope so. I have i dont know, actual actuly. Number of japanese people have read it and they said they appreciated it Japanese Culture was very polite so i dont know if they would tell mef they hated it or not but i hope its there because i resist any kind offfort on the american or japanese side. Relative was or caricature or fairytale telling. I tried to te the perspective of people involved, even when there is villa theres a whole chapter about someone kind of the closest thing to the maermind in the entire book and its written fm his rspective he is unquestionably a villain. Hes charge for other crimes he mmits. I do try because find histo morning, i don enjoy it. Also, dont think its history if youre not trying to help inform people to explain why ople are doing that. If you dont explain that, its just a wikedia entry. To what extent did politics affect perpetratorsf war crimes ainst priners of war . That was a hug influence. The book stops basically in march, april of 1942. 46my. A lot of the decisionsome later with both german and japanese scientists but two of these issues i address, one is that was incredibly controversial at the time. It was publicly released, right about because it was in the water at the time inanuary 1946. There are individuals who regard their picks and chooses is being important lower people for the sa reason as being too important to reconstruct occupation programs and part off that, this is still early 1946, part of it is an understanding in the u. S. , military strategic interest to get japan on its feet as quickly as possible. The soviets who have a lot of interest, longterm rival but also in the background of this book, it comes up a couple of different times, a major driver of policy. Along answer to short question so i apologize but o thing i tried toet into peoples perspectives, including h people viewhe chinese civil war, i also find it important to think about history not as we know it to have happened. Obviously now we know the people take over the mainland of china and he gets pusd in b no one knows it at the time. 1945 and 46, theres just civil war in china and is having all sortof political and military strategi implications people are trying to deal wh in real time. I tried to convey some of the in presenting context in t. That is a good question the there. But we ever have arial of a trial . I guess we did in that case. The questioner is saying currently, is there a possibility . A trial of the trial . Youould look at any number of cases, whatever you want to answer but i think its an interesting idea. It is. One example, the closest anything has come, two things. Thebama ainistration for a number of collocated and debatable poly reasonsecided to not seek accountability a transparency abo abuses of the war on terr. Sort of famously working on the russia investigation put in charge o the policy there were civil suits including one by jose who was an american tizen involved in terrorism and get prosecuted i think 25 years. Hes objected t all sorts of abuses as well and brought a lawsuit against john maybe five or ten physical the courts ultimately dismissed the suit just because he did anything wrong but the doctrine people are more familiar with today and en but qualified immunity, you have to clearlyhow what the government did was wrong. U have these once going after the wyers essentially and they have not been successful. Wi hold up over time for ada thats why it is history. We wont know if they bri charges against americans as lawyers, we just wont know til Something Like that happens. Relate the normal they triednd failed. Theyv been investigating afghanistan including american war crimes, they theoreticly charged american lawyers complicity, it is not inconceivable. Let happen . Will be little feasible . I don know. That is what it is history. One more timeo emphasize, the book is not. Is nowhere near a nerdy as i am. [laughter] dont take it a, give it a shot. I think you will find it an interestg read in a period of history that we dont really know about b we never heard of you could probably start your own blog week by week what is happening in guantanamo and how it relates to the book. [silence] this conversation, i want to say couple things before, i want to tell you,id you know theres a quarter museum in tokyo . I didnt know that. I have and there are many different kinds of torture thingseferred to but the water is one of tm and i just thought yd want to know that and now you don have to go. [laughter] it is ieresting though that s kind of this little footnote. A coue of other things, every time i watch, iearned while that is howou the information you get. The insides of what is going on. It is terrific so thank you so much for this. Come back anytime. Want to do an advertisement for our Upcoming Event to talk about a new book coming out on tuesday called undaunted. It is a memoir. So i think that will be a lot of fun but i cannot thank you enough. I know how appreciated our guests are they have many commentsnd questions but we will have to bring you back. Thank you so much. Thank you. A look at some books being published this week. Msnbc preparing america for the cold war and saving freedom. The media is too biased to be trusted. A wuhan diary, chinese writer providing a firsthand look at the covered lockdown in china. Also being published this week will modern warriors, pattern and fox news host profiling is that the u. S. Military. Life of american fighter and intellectual henry adams in the last american aristocrats. Ali settle is complete, wherever books are sold and watch many others in the future on book tv on cspan2. You are watching tv on cspan2, television for serious readers. Here are some programs to watch out for tonight, im talking about the 1986 Chernobyl Nuclear disaster in our Interview Program afterwards, political scientist deborah stone argues numbers on objective and explains numerous figures impacting our lives daily. Find more Schedule Information booktv. Org for consult your program guide. Good afternoon. I want to welcome you on behalf of humanities and the seller festival book