democrats set to release CIA "torture" report today

[homersapien 11,372]

I am against torture. Sorry if that puts me out of favor with most here. I will however never hesitate to put a bullet into an enemy on the battlefield in accordance with the law of war. Our enemy today will likely not wear a uniform. Does that lessen their treatment once removed from the battlefield?

My understanding is that our enemies are not removed from the battlefield, or are they? Instead, they are bombed into smithereens, or, as you would do, shoot them. Is that better ? Really ? My question is sincere because if we kill them we may deprive ourselves of beneficial info.

No one has ever argued for grotesque and deforming torture such as what Senator McCain endured, but that is what the Dems would have the public imagine is happening (aside from the Abu Ghraib anomaly) . From what I've read, only three individuals have been water boarded. Haven't a clue about those deprived of sleep or exposed to other forms of torture but it's stated that those methods are effective if done properly and no permanent harm is endured. If we don't get the results, then no, I wouldn't favor doing such but the statements by ALL Directors of the CIA verify that these techniques actually work.

The issue I hear repeatedly in interviews with former intelligence officers is that we are no longer gathering intelligence from individuals to any degree. If we shoot them all then we definitely won't get info from them.

The issue I think most people have with our "enhanced interrogation" methods is that it may be humiliation without purpose, such as Abu Ghraib, (which was not ever sanctioned and was not used by the perpetrators to garner intel). The idea of water-boarding, et cetera, is distasteful but so is killing another human being and I'm not averse to either so long as it protects our nation's interests.

Torture is torture, whether it is performed on three people, twenty people, one hundred people, or eight thousand. Torture is the kind of immoral thing that the United States is supposed to stand against. It separates us from people like the Nazi's, or the Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin specifically. More importantly, it is supposed to be something that is banned by law. Water-boarding is torture. It is not only distasteful, it is torture. Sleep deprivation and stress positions are also torture. All three would be classified as torture by the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

I can understand the urgent need for information in what some would call "desperate times", but torture is a line of moral principle that should never be crossed by any country that claims to support human rights. That there are still American citizens that are alright with their government having officially sanctioned torture is something I find truly disturbing.

Well, apparently the "conservative view" is:

"It's not a pretty thing and there are things the American Public doesn't need to know."

[homersapien 11,372]

I have no problems using whatever it takes to get info as long as I know the bastard has it. I wouldnt just run around detaining and torturing people to see what i could find. i would have to be sure and have some strong indicators i had the right bad guy. These things should not be public. We civilians or our enemies need not know.

One thing i am finding some irony is the reason for some republicans not wanting the release of this info. They claim it would cause retaliation and put american lives at risk. These same people have claimed these terrorist have always hated us through no fault of our own and want to kill us anyway.

I am astounded at the flippant attitude toward Big Brother.

Especially coming from the same folks who accuse liberals of threatening our liberty with policies that supposedly foster big government.

[AUUSN 823]

This report was a cherry picking of certain facts. You people would have us sit back and offer these people milk and cookies and ask them pretty please. We did not use torture. So some POS was made uncomfortable and sleep deprived and a few other things. Big fat hairy deal. Whatever it takes to save American lives. I am sick and tired of having the country I love run down and made to look like the scourge of the earth by a bunch of weasels like DI FI and the rest of the anti american left that occupies the democrat party. I know John McCain signed on to this but he is senile and suffering from the effects of real torture. This was known years ago and they signed off on it. Spare me the be about these tactics making us more hated. These people aim to wipe us out unless we convert to their religion. You jackwagons still think if we can just understand their justified rage and negotiate then we can all live in peace and harmony. You know empathize with them and all that jazz. After all we caused this by supporting Israel. We should let them wipe the Jews off the face of the earth. What is about liberals that makes you want to side with our enemies and believe the worst about your own country?

You have jumped the shark. Wow what an epic and whiny rant. John McCain's service to this country dwarfs yours and mine by a long shot. How about a little respect? He has a Naval warship named after him, you are a two-bit, extremist ranter of a sports forum.

[autigeremt 6,610]

We do realize this report is one sided...correct? I'm not sure I'd give it 100% on the trustworthy scale. I'll accept it as information....

Every member of the Senate Subcommittee on Intelligence is a Democrat?

Only Democrats provided input in this report.

[autigeremt 6,610]

What's the thought on this administrations use of rendition? Drone strikes on foreign soil that causes collateral loss of life?

We fight an enemy that doesn't adhere to the Geneva Convention. While that's no reason to torture, it's something to think about.

Too deep for me. I wouldn't know where to begin. All I can say is, we have to understand the difference between errors in judgement and a compromise of our principles. We have to somehow stop using our mistakes as political fodder.

What principals? Have you paid attention to this nation over the last 12 years? There are no principals left....just suggested action.

[autigeremt 6,610]

As for those bashing John McCain....I'd be careful treading on that one! He went through HELL and came out the other end. Very few would do such things.

[homersapien 11,372]

This report is full of distortions and half truths and cherry picking of things. We didn't torture anyone. I suppose we should offer them milk and cookies and ask them nicely and see how that works. The idea of using american courts as if these people were common street criminals is absurd. Some of you just must hate your own country. Obama and DIane Feinstein do. Nobody will trust us again and our intelligence network will be shattered. You did not want to fight them after they attacked us and you don't want to do any thing to try to prevent these attacks. What do you propose we do?

Can you please find an alternative to "they hate our country" schtick? It's tiresome, not to mention ironically backward conceptually.

[AURaptor 1,122]

As for those bashing John McCain....I'd be careful treading on that one! He went through HELL and came out the other end. Very few would do such things.

Sorry, no amount of hell gives him the right to bash our country for things HE went through, and things WE didn't do.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

This report is full of distortions and half truths and cherry picking of things. We didn't torture anyone. I suppose we should offer them milk and cookies and ask them nicely and see how that works. The idea of using american courts as if these people were common street criminals is absurd. Some of you just must hate your own country. Obama and DIane Feinstein do. Nobody will trust us again and our intelligence network will be shattered. You did not want to fight them after they attacked us and you don't want to do any thing to try to prevent these attacks. What do you propose we do?

Can you please find an alternative to "they hate our country" schtick? It's tiresome, not to mention ironically backward conceptually.

Seriously? Are you seriously asking an extremist to examine his core philosophy? There are two undeniable constants in their world. They cannot be changed. 1) barry sux and, 2) libtards is evil (they hate America).

[icanthearyou 4,462]

As for those bashing John McCain....I'd be careful treading on that one! He went through HELL and came out the other end. Very few would do such things.

Sorry, no amount of hell gives him the right to bash our country for things HE went through, and things WE didn't do.

I think it gives him the right to criticize our government. You buffoonish extremist really are stupid and hypocritical. If you criticize the government, you are patriotic. If anyone else criticizes the government they are anti-American.

[AUUSN 823]

<p>7 Things Christians Should Know About Torture<br /><br />

By Joe Carter - December 9<br /><br />

<br /><br />

<br />

http://www.canonandculture.com/7-things-christians-should-know-about-torture/

A new report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on the CIA’s use of torture of suspected terrorists finds the agency repeatedly lied about brutal techniques that were both ineffective and illegal. The report also highlights examples of the extreme abuse, neglect, and torture of prisoners by CIA interrogators. As Time magazine notes,<br /><br />

<br /><br />

<br />

Aspects of the detention and interrogation of al Qaeda suspects, according to the report, included: a detainee becoming unconscious during the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, requiring medical attention as he regurgitated air and water; a detainee dying from exposure to extreme cold shackled to the floor in what government observers later described as a dungeon; detainees’ injuries being allowed to deteriorate as part of interrogation; and psychological effects from interrogation including hallucinations, paranoia, self-harm and self-mutilation. The report also finds the CIA at times lost detainees and discovered them only after days of neglect.<br /><br />

<br />

Since the terrorist attacks on 9/11, Christians in Americans have mostly remained silent about the use of torture or assumed it was a legitimate and warranted tactic in the “war on terror.” A few Christians have given it serious thought, though, and continue to debate its use and morality. Many still disagree on whether torture is always wrong or whether there are certain extraordinary circumstances under which it is an exception to the rule that we cannot justify doing evil that good may come (cf. Romans 3:8).<br /><br />

My own personal view is similar to that of Southern Baptist ethicist Kenneth Magnuson, who has observed,<br /><br />

<br />

Even if it is possible to defend torture theoretically, it is far from certain that it can be used justly in practice. Whether it could be contained to the few cases in which it may be justifiable; whether an adequate system of accountability could be set in place to prevent abuses; whether the interrogator is capable of extracting the information with the least coercion necessary (without turning quickly to torture because it is deemed to be justified); and whether it is possible to know for certain that the suspect indeed has relevant information; these are but a few concerns.<br /><br />

<br />

Based on this criteria, the report shows that the CIA’s program was not justifiable, did not include an adequate system of accountability to prevent abuses, and did not extract information with the least coercion necessary. For these reasons, the CIA’s actions were both immoral and violated the standards and laws recognized by the U.S. regarding the treatment of prisoners.<br /><br />

<br />

But this report should be the beginning, rather than the end, of the discussion on the morality and legality of torture. To aid in future discussions, I’d like to highlight seven things <br />

<br />

I believe all Christians should know about torture:<br /><br />

<br />

1. Torture is clearly defined; Despite the claims of many supporters of the CIAs methods and techniques, torture is not a murky or ill-defined concept. The legal definition of torture to which the U.S. subscribes can be found in the UN Convention Against Torture:<br /><br />

<br />

For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.<br /><br />

By this standard the CIA has admitted that they have engaged in torture. (At the end of this article I’ve also include six more definitions of torture adopted by the U.S.)<br /><br />

<br />

2. Many enhanced interrogation techniques fit the definition of torture. A list of enhanced interrogation techniques that the CIA has admitted to using are:<br /><br />

<br />

1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.<br /><br />

<br />

2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.<br /><br />

<br />

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.<br /><br />

<br />

4. Long Time 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.<br /><br />

<br />

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.<br /><br />

<br />

6. Water Boarding: 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.<br /><br />

The last three indisputably fit the definition of torture under all seven references.<br /><br />

<br />

3. Waterboarding is torture; Waterboarding has been used as a form of torture since the Middle Ages. Oxford scholar Cecil Roth writes in his book The Spanish Inquisition:<br /><br />

The water-torture was more ingenious, and more fiendish. The prisoner was fastened almost naked on a sort of trestle with sharp-edged rungs and kept in position with an iron band, his head lower than his feet, and his limbs bound to the side-pieces with agonizing tightness. The mouth was then forced open and a strip of linen inserted into the gullet. Through this, water was poured from a jar ( jarra ), obstructing the throat and nostrils and producing a state of semi-suffocation. The process was repeated time after time, as many as eight jarras being applied.<br /><br />

<br />

The U.S. military has also always considered waterboarding to be torture. During the U.S. Army Trials of Japanese War Criminals Conducted in Yokohama, Japan, Yukio Asano was charged with “Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: 1. Did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture PWs.” Among the specifications listed were “beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward.” Asano was convicted of a war crime for waterboarding American prisoners.<br /><br />

<br />

Many critics claim that waterboarding of prisoners cannot be considered torture since the technique has been used in training in the U.S. Navy’s Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE) school. The waterboarding done in SERE, however, has been frequently criticized within the Department of Defense.<br /><br />

<br />

Also, as Malcolm Nance, counter-terrorism and terrorism intelligence consultant for the U.S. government’s Special Operations and a former Navy SERE school instructor, said in Small Wars Journal, there is a profound difference between waterboarding in training and what was done by the CIA:<br /><br />

The carnival-like he-said, she-said of the legality of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques has become a form of doublespeak worthy of Catch-22 . Having been subjected to them all, I know these techniques, if in fact they are actually being used, are not dangerous when applied in training for short periods. However, when performed with even moderate intensity over an extended time on an unsuspecting prisoner – it is torture, without doubt.<br /><br />

The CIA’s own Inspector General says that what his agency did and what is done in SERE training are completely different:<br /><br />

A footnote in the recently released 2004 CIA Office of Inspector General’s review of the government’s interrogation program appears to undermine a key legal justification that allowed the spy agency to use the controversial technique of waterboarding against suspected terrorist detainees.<br /><br />

A central legal—and polemic—argument for use of waterboarding has been the fact that some U.S. soldiers are subjected to the procedure during training. In 2002, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel wrote a memo approving the technique, based in part on the fact that it had produced no long-term ill effects on soldiers who had undergone waterboarding during training. Those memos were later withdrawn by the DOJ.<br /><br />

But the latest review shows the waterboarding technique used on suspected terrorists was different in technique and duration from that administered to U.S. soldiers.<br /><br />

The OIG report says that experts’ initial analysis of waterboarding “was probably misrepresented at the time,” according to the CIA’s Office of Medical Services, because “the SERE [survival, evasion, resistance, and escape program] waterboard experience is so different from the subsequent agency usage as to make it almost irrelevant.”<br /><br />

As a consequence, the OIG found, “according to [the Office of Medical Services], there was no a priori reason to believe that applying the waterboard with the frequency and intensity with which it was used by the psychologist/interrogators was either efficacious or medically safe.”<br /><br />

4. The U.S. military opposes torture, including waterboarding — Waterboarding has always been defined as torture by American courts and military tribunals.<br /><br />

Sen. John McCain, who was tortured while a prisoner in Vietnam, has said waterboarding is torture and adds, ” People who have worn the uniform and had the experience know that this is a terrible and odious practice and should never be condoned in the U.S. We are a better nation than that. Charles Krulak, former commandant of the Marine Corps, and Joseph Hoar, former commander in chief of U.S. Central Command, say that waterboarding is torture and note that such methods “have nurtured the recuperative power of the enemy.” John Hutson, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, says “Waterboarding was devised in the Spanish Inquisition. Next to the rack and thumbscrews, it’s the most iconic example of torture.”<br /><br />

As Phillip Carter notes, “If there really were tactical or operational reasons for us to continue waterboarding, you might expect the military to favor it.”<br /><br />

And yet the JAGs and the military oppose the technique in the strongest terms. They oppose it because they recognize it’s not particularly effective, and because they have to worry about our soldiers being subject to such treatment if captured. Most of all, they oppose it because they recognize the value of clarity for maintaining the discipline of America’s military. As one of us has written, “[T]here are few slopes more slippery than that from small war crimes to large ones. Any wartime action, no matter how heinous, can always be justified by some battlefield exigency.”<br /><br />

By claiming that waterboarding is not torture, we are saying that it is not a violation of the Geneva Convention. That means that our enemies are legally justified in using this “interrogation” technique on American service members. This fact was recognized by 29 former high-ranking military officers in a letter sent to Sen. John Warner about their opposition to the redefinition of the Geneva Convention statutes:<br /><br />

We have abided by this standard in our own conduct for a simple reason: the same standard serves to Protect American servicemen and women when they engage in conflicts covered by Common Article 3. Preserving the integrity of this standard has become increasingly important in recent years when our adversaries often are not nation-states. Congress acted in 1997 to further this goal by criminalizing Violations of Common Article 3 in the War Crimes Act, enabling us to hold accountable those who abuse our captured personnel, no matter the nature of the armed conflict.<br /><br />

If any agency of the U.S. government is excused from compliance with these standards, or if we seek to redefine what Common Article 3 requires, we should not imagine that our enemies will take notice of the Technical distinctions when they hold U.S. prisoners captive. If degradation, humiliation, physical and mental brutalization of prisoners is decriminalized or considered permissible under a restrictive interpretation of Common Article 3, we will forfeit all credible objections should such barbaric practices be inflicted upon American prisoners.<br /><br />

This is not just a theoretical concern. We have people deployed right now in theaters where Common Article 3 is the only source of legal protection should they be captured. If we allow that standard to be eroded, we put their safety at greater risk.<br /><br />

The counter to this is that Al Qaeda does not follow the Geneva Convention. While this is true, it is a shortsighted critique. As Sen. McCain says, “I doubt they will be the last enemy America will fight, and we should not undermine today our defense of international prohibitions against torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners of war that we will need to rely on in the future.”<br /><br />

5. Mental torture is as serious as physical torture — The claim that certain techniques cause only “mental” harm misunderstands the nature of torture. John McCain, a man who became intimately familiar with such treatment, explains the power of mental torture:<br /><br />

[T]here has been considerable press attention to a tactic called “waterboarding,” where a prisoner is restrained and blindfolded while an interrogator pours water on his face and into his mouth–causing the prisoner to believe he is being drowned. He isn’t, of course; there is no intention to injure him physically. But if you gave people who have suffered abuse as prisoners a choice between a beating and a mock execution, many, including me, would choose a beating. The effects of most beatings heal. The memory of an execution will haunt someone for a very long time and damage his or her psyche in ways that may never heal. In my view, to make someone believe that you are killing him by drowning is no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank. I believe that it is torture, very exquisite torture.<br /><br />

6. Torture is an ineffective interrogation technique — While it makes no difference to the moral calculus, it is important to note that torture has never been proven to be effective.<br /><br />

In testimony presented to the Senate Judiciary committee, FBI interrogator Ali Soufan said:<br /><br />

The issue that I am here to discuss today – interrogation methods used to question terrorists – is not, and should not be, a partisan matter. We all share a commitment to using the best interrogation method possible that serves our national security interests and fits squarely within the framework of our nation’s principles.<br /><br />

From my experience – and I speak as someone who has personally interrogated many terrorists and elicited important actionable intelligence– I strongly believe that it is a mistake to use what has become known as the “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a position shared by many professional operatives, including the CIA officers who were present at the initial phases of the Abu Zubaydah interrogation.<br /><br />

These techniques, from an operational perspective, are ineffective, slow and unreliable, and as a result harmful to our efforts to defeat al Qaeda.<br /><br />

The recent report also notes that, based on the CIA’s own records,<br /><br />

The CIA’s use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees. . . While being subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques and afterwards, multiple CIA detainees fabricated information, resulting in faulty intelligence. Detainees provided fabricated information on critical intelligence issues, including the terrorist threats which the CIA identified as its highest priorities.<br /><br />

7. Torture harms the torturers too — The damage done by using such torture techniques is not only done to the prisoner. The New York Times notes how the torture disturbed some CIA personnel:<br /><br />

The torture of prisoners at times was so extreme that some C.I.A. personnel tried to put a halt to the techniques, but were told by senior agency officials to continue the interrogation sessions.<br /><br />

The Senate report quotes a series of August 2002 cables from a C.I.A. facility in Thailand, where the agency’s first prisoner was held. Within days of the Justice Department’s approval to begin waterboarding the prisoner, Abu Zubaydah, the sessions became so extreme that some C.I.A. officers were “to the point of tears and choking up,” and several said they would elect to be transferred out of the facility if the brutal interrogations continued.<br /><br />

Psychiatrist Jonathan Shay, author of Achilles In Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character, found that dehumanizing the enemy during the Vietnam war caused psychological damage to American troops:<br /><br />

Restoring honor to the enemy is an essential step in recovery from combat PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). While other things are obviously needed as well, the veteran’s self-respect never fully recovers so long as he is unable to see the enemy as worthy. In the words of one of our patients, a war against subhuman vermin “has no honor.” This in true even in victory; in defeat, the dishonoring makes life unendurable. (pg. 115)<br /><br />

In our attempts to dehumanize our enemy we end up becoming less than human ourselves. It would be a Pyrrhic victory to save civilization and lose our humanity<br /><br />

As political scientist Glenn Tinder once wrote, the human being is both fallen and exalted, sacred and yet morally degraded. These two aspects of humanity cannot be separated. A fact, Tinder admits, that is “hard for common sense to grasp.” Indeed, it is almost impossible to grasp when we try to apply this concept to our enemies. We often fall for one of two extremes.<br /><br />

The “liberal” (read: pacifist) position, for example, tends to be overly empathetic, refusing to use any force at all against an enemy since it can been seen as a failure to “humanize” our foes. But this is just one of the ways in which we can err. The “conservative” position, which seeks retribution and dehumanizes our opponents in order to distance them from ourselves, can be just as dangerous, particularly for those who must carry out this war.<br /><br />

We must never hesitate to defend our culture, our future, and our lives against those who seek to destroy us. The pacifist’s solution of laying down our arms in the face of such an enemy is suicidal. The conservative position, which is willing to face up to and address the evil of terrorism, provides a more adequate approach.<br /><br />

Yet the conservative position must never forget that the evil comes not just from the actions of “subhuman vermin” but from the heart of a fallen, sacred yet degraded, human being. If we are to preserve our own humanity we must not forget that our enemy differs from us in degree, not in kind.<br /><br />

Addendum: Legal Definitions of Torture<br /><br />

1.Part 1, Article 1 and the US Reservations of the UN Convention Against Torture: The term “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.<br /><br />

2.The US Reservations for the UN Convention Against Torture: In order to constitute torture, an act must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.<br /><br />

3.Article 32 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands . This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person, but also to any other measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents.<br /><br />

4.Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health<br /><br />

5.Article 7(2)(e) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: “Torture” means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions.<br /><br />

6.Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture For the purposes of this Convention, torture shall be understood to be any act intentionally performed whereby physical or mental pain or suffering is inflicted on a person for purposes of criminal investigation, as a means of intimidation, as personal punishment, as a preventive measure, as a penalty, or for any other purpose. Torture shall also be understood to be the use of methods upon a person intended to obliterate the personality of the victim or to diminish his physical or mental capacities, even if they do not cause physical pain or mental anguish. The concept of torture shall not include physical or mental pain or suffering that is inherent in or solely the consequence of lawful measures, provided that they do not include the performance of the acts or use of the methods referred to in this article.<br /><br />

7.18 United States Code Title 18, &sect;2340(2) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control<br /><br />

(2)“severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—<br /><br />

(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;<br /><br />

the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;<br /><br />

the threat of imminent death; or<br /><br />

(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality;</p>

[AURaptor 1,122]

I think it gives him the right to criticize our government. You buffoonish extremist really are stupid and hypocritical. If you criticize the government, you are patriotic. If anyone else criticizes the government they are anti-American.

We didn't torture. A grand total of 3 were waterboarded. 3

Obama's lone accomplishment to America was to capture / kill UBL.

That doesn't happen unless what happens ?

Enhanced interrogation of those who would kill 10,000 citizens and not bat an eye.

You gonna hold Obama to the same level ? Why isn't HE being castigated for murdering civilians w/ military drones ?

I bet you ask anyone, they'll take a few water boarding sessions over a drone fired missile to the face, every day.

The bufoonish stupid extremists are those who want to destroy this country, like Obama

[AUUSN 823]

I think it gives him the right to criticize our government. You buffoonish extremist really are stupid and hypocritical. If you criticize the government, you are patriotic. If anyone else criticizes the government they are anti-American.

We didn't torture. A grand total of 3 were waterboarded. 3

Obama's lone accomplishment to America was to capture / kill UBL.

That doesn't happen unless what happens ?

Enhanced interrogation of those who would kill 10,000 citizens and not bat an eye.

You gonna hold Obama to the same level ? Why isn't HE being castigated for murdering civilians w/ military drones ?

I bet you ask anyone, they'll take a few water boarding sessions over a drone fired missile to the face, every day.

The bufoonish stupid extremists are those who want to destroy this country, like Obama

I'd rather take a hellfire missile to the face rather than be waterboarded and sit in a CIA black site awaiting my demise. The hellfire is a quick death.

[AURaptor 1,122]

I'd rather take a hellfire missile to the face rather than be waterboarded and sit in a CIA black site awaiting my demise. The hellfire is a quick death.

Don't plot to murder infidels, and you'll avoid both.

[AUUSN 823]

I'd rather take a hellfire missile to the face rather than be waterboarded and sit in a CIA black site awaiting my demise. The hellfire is a quick death.

Don't plot to murder infidels, and you'll avoid both.

For a guy that quotes Churchill, you are seriously void of substance. You think it was just terrorist that were subjected to this? Better try again. I know better.

[AURaptor 1,122]

I'd rather take a hellfire missile to the face rather than be waterboarded and sit in a CIA black site awaiting my demise. The hellfire is a quick death.

Don't plot to murder infidels, and you'll avoid both.

For a guy that quotes Churchill, you are seriously void of substance. You think it was just terrorist that were subjected to this? Better try again. I know better.

Sure you do. But you do a great job in hiding it !

[AUUSN 823]

I'd rather take a hellfire missile to the face rather than be waterboarded and sit in a CIA black site awaiting my demise. The hellfire is a quick death.

Don't plot to murder infidels, and you'll avoid both.

For a guy that quotes Churchill, you are seriously void of substance. You think it was just terrorist that were subjected to this? Better try again. I know better.

Sure you do. But you do a great job in hiding it !

jajajajajajajajaja

[AURaptor 1,122]

jajajajajajajajaja

Gonna need a translator

[AUUSN 823]

Zero Dark Dishonesty

The CIA says torture helped the United States find Osama bin Laden, but the Senate says it made the search even harder.

By Yochi Dreazen

Yochi Dreazen is a Managing Editor for News at Foreign Policy. He is also writer-in-residence at the Center for a New American Security. His book about military suicide was published by Random House's Crown division in 2014.

Prior to joining Foreign Policy, Dreazen was a contributing editor at the Atlantic and the senior national security correspondent for National Journal. He began his career at the Wall Street Journal and spent 11 years at the newspaper, most recently as its military correspondent. He was born in Chicago, and later attended the University of Pennsylvania. At Penn, he edited the award-winning daily campus newspaper and graduated Magna Cum Laude in 1999 with degrees in History and English. He was hired by the Wall Street Journal immediately after graduation. Dreazen arrived in Iraq in April 2003 with the Fourth Infantry Division, and spent the next two years living in Baghdad as the Wall Street Journal's main Iraq correspondent.

Dreazen has made more than 12 lengthy trips to Iraq and Afghanistan and has spent a total of nearly four years on the ground in the two countries, mostly doing front-line combat embeds. He has reported from more than 20 countries, including Pakistan, Russia, China, Israel, Japan, Turkey, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia.

In 2010, Dreazen received the Military Reporters & Editors association’s top award for domestic military reporting in a large publication for a series of articles about military suicide and the psychological traumas impacting veterans of the two long wars. His writing has appeared in the Washington Post, Smithsonian, Tablet and the New Republic and he appears regularly on TV and radio programs such as NPR's Diane Rehm Show and PBS' Washington Week with Gwen Ifill. Dreazen gives frequent lectures about journalism, the wars and current events to both civilian and military audiences.

Zero Dark Dishonesty

The CIA has insisted for years that Osama bin Laden was tracked and ultimately killed based on information gleaned from the spy agency’s brutal interrogations of al Qaeda operatives detained at black sites around the world. The Senate’s torture report is now bluntly asserting that the CIA lied. The information that led to bin Laden’s death, the report concludes, was obtained from militants long before they were first tortured by the CIA.

The 500-page executive summary of the five-year, $40 million Senate investigation into the CIA’s post-9/11 interrogation program asserts that the spy agency exaggerated its effectiveness, misled the Bush administration and Capitol Hill about the specifics of what was done to detainees by American agents, and used interrogation methods — including placing a whirling power drill close to the body of a detainee — that were far more brutal than has previously been known.

A footnote buried deep in the report, meanwhile, suggests that then-Secretary of State Colin Powell’s public case for the invasion of Iraq drew on false information that a detainee told his interrogators to end his brutalization at their hands. The report says that a Libyan national named Ibn Shaykh al-Libi was detained in an unnamed country and tortured by its intelligence operatives. While in their custody, Libi reported that “Iraq was supporting al-Qa’ida and providing assistance with chemical and biological weapons,” according to the report. Some of that information made it into the infamous — and entirely incorrect — speech that Powell made at the U.N. to justify the Iraq War. The report says that Libi “recanted the claim after he was rendered to CIA custody … claiming that he had been tortured … and only told them what he assessed they wanted to hear.”

Still, the report’s section on the CIA’s public claims about the bin Laden raid is among its most explosive because it directly undercuts the agency’s explanations for how it carried out one of the biggest intelligence coups in its history.

The spy agency has said for years that it found bin Laden by carefully tracking the movements of a trusted bin Laden courier named Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti.

The spy agency has said for years that it found bin Laden by carefully tracking the movements of a trusted bin Laden courier named Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti. The courier, according to the CIA, was identified based on information gleaned from detainees subjected to a variety of brutal interrogation methods, including waterboarding and sleep deprivation. The Senate report flatly rejects that assertion.

“The vast majority of the intelligence acquired on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti was originally acquired from sources unrelated to the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program, and the most accurate information acquired from a CIA detainee was provided prior to the CIA subjecting the detainee to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques,” the report concludes.

Detainees who were tortured, the report continues, “provided fabricated, inconsistent, and generally unreliable information on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti throughout their detention.”

The dispute revolves around a militant named Hassan Ghul, who was captured by Kurdish authorities in Iraqi Kurdistan in January 2004 and ultimately turned over to the CIA. The spy agency has long maintained that Ghul only shared important details about Kuwaiti after being tortured by agency operatives.

Not so, says the Senate probe. Instead, the report concludes that Ghul had been providing valuable intelligence long before CIA interrogators subjected him to the worst of their abuses. In a CIA inspector general report cited in the report, a CIA operative who had been involved in Ghul’s initial questioning said that he gave them enough information for 21 separate reports and “sang like a tweetie bird. He opened up right away and was cooperative from the outset.”

His cooperation didn’t prevent the CIA from shifting Ghul from the detention site where he was initially questioned, code-named COBALT, to an agency black site code-named BLACK. That, according to the report, is where his suffering truly started.

When he arrived at BLACK, agency operatives stripped him, shaved off his beard and hair, and forced him to stand against a wall with his hands held uncomfortably over his head. The interrogators asked the agency for permission to subject him to even harsher treatment.

“[The] interrogation team believes, based on [Hassan Ghul’s] reaction to the initial contact, that his al-Qa’ida briefings and his earlier experiences with U.S. military interrogators have convinced him there are limits to the physical contact interrogators can have with him,” according to a CIA memo cited in the report. “The interrogation team believes the approval and employment of enhanced measures should sufficiently shift [Hassan Ghul’s] paradigm of what he expects to happen.”

Senior agency officials signed off, and agency interrogators kept Ghul awake for 59 hours straight while refusing to allow him to see a doctor after he complained of severe back pain. He

began to hallucinate, according to the report, but the sleep deprivation continued.

began to hallucinate, according to the report, but the sleep deprivation continued. A CIA medical staffer later said that the refusal to provide Ghul with prompt medical attention left him experiencing “notable physiological fatigue,” including abdominal and back muscle pain/spasm, ‘heaviness’ and mild paralysis of arms, legs and feet [that] are secondary to his hanging position and extreme degree of sleep deprivation.”

Senate investigators say that Ghul, despite the torture, “provided no actionable threat information” or useful intelligence on Kuwaiti, the bin Laden courier. Ghul was released in 2006 and was later killed in an American drone strike.

In its formal response to the probe, the CIA acknowledged that Ghul was initially cooperative with its operatives, but said the quality of the intelligence gleaned from him was significantly better after he had been tortured.

Before being subjected to the brutal interrogation techniques, the CIA asserts, Ghul had merely “speculated” that Kuwaiti was a courier for bin Laden and a trusted member of the terror mastermind’s inner circle. After the torture started, the CIA says, Ghul specified that Kuwaiti had passed a message from bin Laden to another senior al Qaeda operative. “This information was not only more concrete and less speculative, it also corroborated information” suggesting that Kuwaiti had been a member of al Qaeda long after 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — in an apparent attempt to prevent the CIA from deciphering Kuwaiti’s true relationship to bin Laden — asserted that Kuwaiti had left the terror group.

Either way, there is no disputing that Ghul became a key part of the CIA’s public defense of its torture program and an unwitting participant in the agency’s sophisticated PR campaign designed to sell the narrative that torture helped find bin Laden.

On May 5, 2011, the CIA gave the Senate intelligence panel a document claiming that Ghul provided “Tier One” intelligence about Kuwaiti after being brutally interrogated. That, according to the Senate, was simply incorrect.

“The most detailed and accurate intelligence collected from a CIA detainee” about Kuwaiti “was from Hassan Ghul, and was acquired prior to the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques against Ghul,” the probe concludes.http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/12/10/senate_cia_torture_made_bin_laden_search_harder/

[icanthearyou 4,462]

I think it gives him the right to criticize our government. You buffoonish extremist really are stupid and hypocritical. If you criticize the government, you are patriotic. If anyone else criticizes the government they are anti-American.

We didn't torture. A grand total of 3 were waterboarded. 3

Obama's lone accomplishment to America was to capture / kill UBL.

That doesn't happen unless what happens ?

Enhanced interrogation of those who would kill 10,000 citizens and not bat an eye.

You gonna hold Obama to the same level ? Why isn't HE being castigated for murdering civilians w/ military drones ?

I bet you ask anyone, they'll take a few water boarding sessions over a drone fired missile to the face, every day.

The bufoonish stupid extremists are those who want to destroy this country, like Obama

Typical. Only 3 captives were tortured? Really? Are you being intentionally deceptive?

Yes, everyone who doesn't agree with you is anti-America.

[AUUSN 823]

jajajajajajajajaja

Gonna need a translator

Read para number 5. The CIA admitted that:

Detained some individuals under a flawed interpretation

of the authorities granted to CIA, and;

• Fell short when it came to holding individuals

accountable for poor performance and management failures. https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/CIAs_June2013_Response_to_the_SSCI_Study_on_the_Former_Detention_and_Interrogation_Program.pdf

[Strychnine 1,802]

jajajajajajajajaja

Gonna need a translator

Read para number 5. The CIA admitted that:

Detained some individuals under a flawed interpretation

of the authorities granted to CIA, and;

• Fell short when it came to holding individuals

accountable for poor performance and management failures. https://www.cia.gov/...ion_Program.pdf

That is irrelevant. They were terrorists. They deserved what they got, and they should be thankful for only being made a little uncomfortable. Anything to save lives. Accept those facts.

[autigeremt 6,610]

It doesn't matter! People have to die before there's a change in policy....and more have to die before there's another policy for change.

I don't think for one minute that the CIA used proper technique to get information. I also think the Colonial Army and the spies for George Washington had a policy that involved unusual methods to gain information. Are we supposed to be above this kind of policy??? We used to be, but that was before the enemy decided to cut off heads and use the innocent for target practice.

It's a different world. I'm not sure what it will take to get a moral authority throughout the world.

[AUUSN 823]

In one crucial respect, however, the Senate report falls short. By putting the blame for the program exclusively on the C.I.A., it fails to acknowledge that responsibility for it does not stop there. President George W. Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney, Attorney General John Ashcroft, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, among others, all signed off on the authorization to use enhanced interrogation techniques—tactics that, as President Obama and many others have said, any reasonable person would recognize amount to torture. The Justice Department lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee share in the responsibility, for writing legal memos that gave the C.I.A. a green light to engage in patently illegal conduct. And while the Senate Intelligence Committee was undoubtedly misled about the details of the program, it failed to take action to halt it, even though it was fully aware that detainees were being illegally disappeared and waterboarded.

Nor does accountability end there. We reelected George Bush knowing that he had approved of waterboarding and torture. We have accepted President Obama’s contention that we should look forward, not backward, thereby absolving those who committed war crimes of any accountability. Criminal prosecutions are both unlikely and unnecessary, but some form of official accountability is essential. This report is a start, but as a polity we have not lived up to our own responsibility, to demand accountability for the wrongs done in our name. http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/taking-responsibility-torture

[quietfan 233]

As for those bashing John McCain....I'd be careful treading on that one! He went through HELL and came out the other end. Very few would do such things.

Sorry, no amount of hell gives him the right to bash our country for things HE went through, and things WE didn't do.

I think it gives him the right to criticize our government. You buffoonish extremist really are stupid and hypocritical. If you criticize the government, you are patriotic. If anyone else criticizes the government they are anti-American.

Actually, the First Amendment gives us ALL the right to criticize our government...especial when it condones or supports something that is morally reprehensible.

But yeah, it's hard for me to understand why some cannot see the hypocrisy of "I can and will criticize the government, but you can't and shouldn't!".