Bush administration officials from Vice President Dick Cheney on down signed off on using harsh interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists after asking the Justice Department to endorse their legality, The Associated Press has learned.
The officials also took care to insulate President Bush from a series of meetings where CIA interrogation methods, including waterboarding, which simulates drowning, were discussed and ultimately approved.
A former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the meetings described them Thursday to the AP to confirm details first reported by ABC News on Wednesday. The intelligence official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly discuss the issue.
Who’s in charge here?
Related
Cheney Torture Authorization/Suggestion For Iraq-Al Qaeda “Link”?
Takoma Park, Liberalism Central
Dick Cheney, Secret Democrat?
Just so we have the proper perspective, here are the “enhanced interrogation techniques”:
1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.
2. The Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.
3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.
4. Longtime Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.
5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.
6. Waterboarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner’s face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.
Waterboarding, arguably the most severe, was used on 3 people.
Time to apply these methods to war criminals.
The CIA ADMITTED using it on 3 people. If it’s really only been used on 3 detainees, I’ll eat a giant American flag.
Michael…
That sounds like a great idea for a 7th approved technique.
They used those techniques and worse on prisoners in Iraq. Repeatedly. Remember?
Are you talking about the people who were abusing prisoners for their amusement? The people who were court martialed? We’re talking about interrogation…different matter.
“Are you talking about the people who were abusing prisoners for their amusement? The people who were court martialed? We’re talking about interrogation…different matter.”
Probably not in the eyes of the Iraqis.
And just so we continue to maintain proper perspective, note that these are only the techniques we approved our own government to carry out. We had no say, nor did we want any say, in what Syria did to the people we sent to them.
Also, to maintain proper perspective, note that all of this is still occurring at times to people who have not been formally charged with anything, and indeed whose only crime may have been to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong ethnic background.
Last I checked, we were supposed to be the good guys. Why do you think so little of America?
Also: if this is all no big deal, then why not let the President in on it?
Yes, probably not in the eyes of the Iraqis. That’s why such crimes are so serious. And it’s why such behavior is not approved.
“Torture’s fine as long as you don’t have a black pastor”-cable news
“And it’s why such behavior is not approved.”
-nontheless still carried out. Just ask Maher Arar or Murat Kurnaz.
And, surely the Abu Ghraib torturers were just low level “bad apples” who nver recieved orders and just happened to independently disobey protocol. Yep, yessir, uh huh.
That’s why such crimes are so serious. And it’s why such behavior is not approved.
I’m glad you feel that way. It’s a nice counter-point to the number of pundits and politicians who considered the behavior, at the time of its revelation, to be “justifiable” at least, and “not that big a deal” at most.
Um Scratch, apparently you were asleep, but the abuse to the Iraqi prisoners started with all those approved techniques you stated above plus other approved techniques. The abuse was not limited to one prison, it also happened in Afghanistan. Just because you bought the scapegoating doesn’t mean it was limited in scope.
Also, as for Abu GHraib and the prisons there, you have to understand the civilian leadership (aka Bush Administration) made the purposeful and deliberate decision to not send JAG officers to supervise treatment of prisoners, making outrageous abuse not only likely but inevitable.
Furthermore those bad apples were encouraged to mistreat prisoners in various ways by the civilian torture contractors in charge of interrogation. With no supervision, going to the depraved and sick sexual level they did was just the next step.
The officials also took care to insulate President Bush from a series of meetings
Read: Cut out of the loop.
“Waterboarding, arguably the most severe, was used on 3 people.”
Scratch, waterboarding is torture. Use it once and you’ve destroyed the moral foundation of our country’s war effort. Simple as that.
It’s like saying, ‘well, you know, murder is arguably the most severe crime, but i only did it three times.’
Or, at least, it should be like saying that but clearly conservative war supporters have a severely deformed idea of morality at this point.
And it’s why such behavior is not approved.
Well, not approved if some traitorous American hating scum leaks the photos. But up until that point it’s approved. Or at the very least “approved.”
Fafaroo…
If ever there was an issue on which reasonable people could disagree, it is this one. Myself, I have a hard time saying that we cannot use a technique on known terrorists almost certain to haveinformation that can save lives, when we use that very same technique on our own soldiers in training, and when reporters volunteer to undergo that very same technique to see what it is like so they can write about it.
We have been told that it was used on only three people, and that the information gathered as a result saved lives. I see three possible positions: one thinks this claim is a lie, one thinks this claim is true but the lives saved are not worth using the technique anyway, or one thinks that using this technique is OK in the rare circumstances claimed. I am in the third category.
The Bush administration has an extremely bad track record on honesty and credibility when it comes to terror arrests and terror plots. They have a very bad record on prosecuting terrorism related cases.
This is all beside the point that torture is illegal.
Speaking of which, the Bush administration has a very long history of breaking the law and then admitting it only because of whistle blowers, down playing it saying it is only in rare cases, for limited times or narrow in scope, only to have later whistle blowers and revelations show that their law breaking was wide spread, went on longer than admitted, or were wider in scope. So when the Bush administration admits it used a technique 3 times, it’s likely they used it dozens of times. If they admit to 7 shady techniques it could mean 20.
“According to an ACLU press release, one file, released February 18, stated that “an Iraqi detainee claimed that Americans in civilian clothing beat him in the head and stomach, dislocated his arms, ‘stepped on [his] nose until it [broke],’ stuck an unloaded pistol in his mouth and fired the trigger, choked him with a rope and beat his leg with a baseball bat.” Medical reports corroborated the detainee’s account.
According to the file, soldiers confirmed that plainclothes interrogators from “Task Force 20”—a military group made up of various special operations forces and intelligence operatives—had interrogated this detainee. However, after reporting the abuse, the detainee was told to sign a statement withdrawing his charges or else be held in detention indefinitely. He agreed to drop his claims.”
…
“According to the ACLU: “The pictures showed uniformed soldiers pointing pistols and M-4 rifles at the heads and backs of bound and hooded detainees, and other abuses such as holding a detainee’s head against the wall of a cage.” One sergeant also reported seeing images on Army computers of detainees being “kicked, hit or inhumanely treated while in US custody.” An Army Specialist admitted that photographs depicting similar instances of abuse and torture had been destroyed after the firestorm over the photos from Abu Ghraib.”
…
“The following are excerpts from an investigation by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba (which was ordered by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of Joint Task Force-7. (Complete text of the Taguba report is posted at the MSNBC site.)
In addition, several detainees also described the following acts of abuse, which under the circumstances, I find credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses
a. Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees;
b. Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol;
c. Pouring cold water on naked detainees;
d. Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair;
e. Threatening male detainees with rape;
f. Allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell;
g. Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick.
h. Using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.
(T)he intentional abuse of detainees by military police personnel included the following acts:
a. Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet;
b. Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees;
c. Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing;
d. Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time;
e. Forcing naked male detainees to wear women’s underwear;
f. Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped;
g. Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them;
h. Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture;
i. Writing “I am a Rapest” (sic) on the leg of a detainee alleged to have forcibly raped a 15-year old fellow detainee, and then photographing him naked;
j. Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee’s neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture;
k. A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee;
l. Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee;
m. Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees.
These findings are amply supported by written confessions provided by several of the suspects, written statements provided by detainees, and witness statements.
The various detention facilities operated by the 800th MP Brigade have routinely held persons brought to them by Other Government Agencies (OGAs) without accounting for them, knowing their identities, or even the reason for their detention. The Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center (JIDC) at Abu Ghraib called these detainees “ghost detainees.”
On at least one occasion, the 320th MP Battalion at Abu Ghraib held a handful of “ghost detainees” (6-8) for OGAs that they moved around within the facility to hide them from a visiting International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) survey team. This maneuver was deceptive, contrary to Army Doctrine, and in violation of international law.”
…
“Kurnaz made similar allegations of systematic torture in 2005 when he was still a U.S. prisoner, according to newly declassified notes his attorney took during a conversation at Guantanamo. Kurnaz said then that interrogators in Kandahar dunked his head in water, administered electric shocks to the soles of his feet and hung him by his hands — when he denied being a terrorist.
Kurnaz, who the U.S. military eventually freed without giving a reason, is publishing a book in April that describes his experiences in custody. An ethnic Turk raised in Germany, Kurnaz traveled to Pakistan to study Islam in 2001. He was seized by Pakistani police after the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and was turned over to U.S. troops as a terrorism suspect for a cash bounty, military records show.
When the 19-year-old student was transferred to Guantanamo in January 2002, U.S. and German intelligence officials quickly confirmed that Kurnaz had no links to terrorist groups and had probably been seized by mistake, according to military records produced years later in court proceedings. ”
…
“NEW YORK – The American Civil Liberties Union today made public an analysis of new and previously released autopsy and death reports of detainees held in U.S. facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, many of whom died while being interrogated. The documents show that detainees were hooded, gagged, strangled, beaten with blunt objects, subjected to sleep deprivation and to hot and cold environmental conditions.
“”There is no question that U.S. interrogations have resulted in deaths,”" said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. “”High-ranking officials who knew about the torture and sat on their hands and those who created and endorsed these policies must be held accountable. America must stop putting its head in the sand and deal with the torture scandal that has rocked our military.”"
The documents released today include 44 autopsies and death reports as well as a summary of autopsy reports of individuals apprehended in Iraq and Afghanistan. The documents show that detainees died during or after interrogations by Navy Seals, Military Intelligence and “”OGA”" (Other Governmental Agency) — a term, according to the ACLU, that is commonly used to refer to the CIA.
According to the documents, 21 of the 44 deaths were homicides. Eight of the homicides appear to have resulted from abusive techniques used on detainees, in some instances, by the CIA, Navy Seals and Military Intelligence personnel. The autopsy reports list deaths by “”strangulation,”" “”asphyxiation”" and “”blunt force injuries.”" An overwhelming majority of the so-called “”natural deaths”" were attributed to “”Arteriosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.”" “
Quick summary:
Lots of torture. Lots of innocent people tortured. Torture occurring in multiple places in Iraq, multiple places in Afghanistan. Not to mention Guantanamo. Torture resulting in death. Torture as official policy handed down from the highest levels of our government.
Stop trying to downplay it you sick fuck. The US has become a country that tortures.
Myself, I have a hard time saying that we cannot use a technique on known terrorists almost certain to have information that can save lives, when we use that very same technique on our own soldiers in training, and when reporters volunteer to undergo that very same technique to see what it is like so they can write about it.
You have a hard time saying it because you are ignoring a number of facts about the larger situation.
(1) These techniques have been used on perople who are not known terrorists in addition to those who are known terrorists. For a moral human being, the idea of inflicting torment on innocent people is revolting…so I can only assume, scratch, that you are so effectively terrorized by al-Qaida that you have sacrificed that basic humanity to a desperate need to feel “safe.”
(2) Volunteering to have the procedure done to you eliminates the psychological component of torture; that feeling that perhaps this time your tormentor will simply let you die. Perhaps if we went ahead and killed one or two recruits at random, you would have a leg to stand on with this argument.
(3) There is ample evidence that torture has induced people to spout absolute nonsense just to get the torture to stop. This does not “save lives.”
(4) You fall into the category of “I trust these people when they say that they have saved lives.” And y’know, there’s nothing I can do about that particular brand of ignorance. Because if you can still trust this administration after eight years of shuck and jive, you’ve willfully made yourself blind.
Scratch: “If ever there was an issue on which reasonable people could disagree, it is this one.”
No. Not at all. Absolutely not.
The position that torture is acceptable under any circumstances is simply not reasonable. There is no rational basis to do it.
What reason is there to do it? To get information? The information gotten from someone being tortured is notoriously unreliable. The victim is far more likely to say whatever they believe their torturers want to hear just to get the torture to stop.
The “ticking bomb” scenario? The one where someone has to be tortured because there isn’t time to go thru a legal interrogation? Abso-fuckin’-lutely does not exist. THINK about this. Is it at all likely that we’d find out about a plot only shortly before it culminates, but know enough to know it’s about to happen, know enough to know this particular person has key information, but know nothing else about that key info? We know they know something but we have no idea what it is, only that something is going to happen real soon, but we don’t know what. Uh, uh. Only happens in movies and on TV. Never in real life. Never. You can’t cite even one example from real life anywhere ever.
This is not a situation where reasonable people can disagree because only by throwing reason completely out the window can anyone take teh position that torture works or is necessary.
Scratch: “We have been told that it was used on only three people, and that the information gathered as a result saved lives.”
This would be something we’ve been told by the same people who said Saddam had WMDs? The ones who said the war would be over in 6 months? The ones who said we don’t torture and then admitted we have tortured?” The ones who said there is no unwarranted surveillance program?
You’re trusting those guys?
Why? What possible reason could you have for believing anything they say?
Not to mention with the Bush administrations severe allergy to oversight, it is all to easy to go from Scratch’s “information to save lives” torturing to “torturing for revenge” or “Lord of the Flies” torturing. As has already happened.
“Myself, I have a hard time saying that we cannot use a technique on known terrorists almost certain to haveinformation that can save lives …”
Being willing to do anything, absolutely anything, to save your own skin is not a moral virtue.
As for this:
” … when we use that very same technique on our own soldiers in training, and when reporters volunteer to undergo that very same technique to see what it is like so they can write about it.”
All reasonable people can see a difference between volunteering for something and being subjected to it against one’s will. If you don’t see the distinction, you are not a reasonable person.
To clarify:
It’s even worse when you are willing to do absolutely anything to save your own skin, when that thing is so unreliable and ineffective as torture.
Also, if someone is trained in resisting torture by being tortured, that person knows in the back of their mind that the torture will eventually stop. People being held in prison, without charges, without any hope of legal representation, who are tortured against their will have no such comfort. They never know when or if the torture will stop — which is why so many of them, if not every one of them, will eventually say anything, confess to anything, in the hope that the torture will stop.