Torture Techniques Revealed at Gitmo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

His interrogators even threatened, à la Jack Bauer, to go after his family.

---

Sheesh, that almost has me rooting for the terrorists...

I'd just like to add that it's now clear that General David Petraeus, commander of the combined forces in Iraq, is clearly a terrorist-coddling defeat monkey, since he has this to say about the use of torture:

Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy. This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we—not our enemies—occupy the moral high ground . . . .

Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary . . . .

We are, indeed, warriors. We train to kill our enemies. We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly, and we must be violent at times. What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight, however, is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings.

And here are some more softies coming out against torture, namely an ex-commandant of the Marine Corps and the ex-commander in chief of U.S. Central Command. What a couple of hippies!

It's Our Cage, Too

Torture Betrays Us and Breeds New Enemies

By Charles C. Krulak and Joseph P. Hoar
Thursday, May 17, 2007; A17

Fear can be a strong motivator. It led Franklin Roosevelt to intern tens of thousands of innocent U.S. citizens during World War II; it led to Joseph McCarthy's witch hunt, which ruined the lives of hundreds of Americans. And it led the United States to adopt a policy at the highest levels that condoned and even authorized torture of prisoners in our custody.

Fear is the justification offered for this policy by former CIA director George Tenet as he promotes his new book. Tenet oversaw the secret CIA interrogation program in which torture techniques euphemistically called "waterboarding," "sensory deprivation," "sleep deprivation" and "stress positions" -- conduct we used to call war crimes -- were used. In defending these abuses, Tenet revealed: "Everybody forgets one central context of what we lived through: the palpable fear that we felt on the basis of the fact that there was so much we did not know."

We have served in combat; we understand the reality of fear and the havoc it can wreak if left unchecked or fostered. Fear breeds panic, and it can lead people and nations to act in ways inconsistent with their character.

The American people are understandably fearful about another attack like the one we sustained on Sept. 11, 2001. But it is the duty of the commander in chief to lead the country away from the grip of fear, not into its grasp. Regrettably, at Tuesday night's presidential debate in South Carolina, several Republican candidates revealed a stunning failure to understand this most basic obligation. Indeed, among the candidates, only John McCain demonstrated that he understands the close connection between our security and our values as a nation.

Tenet insists that the CIA program disrupted terrorist plots and saved lives. It is difficult to refute this claim -- not because it is self-evidently true, but because any evidence that might support it remains classified and unknown to all but those who defend the program.

These assertions that "torture works" may reassure a fearful public, but it is a false security. We don't know what's been gained through this fear-driven program. But we do know the consequences.

As has happened with every other nation that has tried to engage in a little bit of torture -- only for the toughest cases, only when nothing else works -- the abuse spread like wildfire, and every captured prisoner became the key to defusing a potential ticking time bomb. Our soldiers in Iraq confront real "ticking time bomb" situations every day, in the form of improvised explosive devices, and any degree of "flexibility" about torture at the top drops down the chain of command like a stone -- the rare exception fast becoming the rule.

To understand the impact this has had on the ground, look at the military's mental health assessment report released earlier this month. The study shows a disturbing level of tolerance for abuse of prisoners in some situations. This underscores what we know as military professionals: Complex situational ethics cannot be applied during the stress of combat. The rules must be firm and absolute; if torture is broached as a possibility, it will become a reality.

This has had disastrous consequences. Revelations of abuse feed what the Army's new counterinsurgency manual, which was drafted under the command of Gen. David Petraeus, calls the "recuperative power" of the terrorist enemy.

Former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld once wondered aloud whether we were creating more terrorists than we were killing. In counterinsurgency doctrine, that is precisely the right question. Victory in this kind of war comes when the enemy loses legitimacy in the society from which it seeks recruits and thus loses its "recuperative power."

The torture methods that Tenet defends have nurtured the recuperative power of the enemy. This war will be won or lost not on the battlefield but in the minds of potential supporters who have not yet thrown in their lot with the enemy. If we forfeit our values by signaling that they are negotiable in situations of grave or imminent danger, we drive those undecideds into the arms of the enemy. This way lies defeat, and we are well down the road to it.

This is not just a lesson for history. Right now, White House lawyers are working up new rules that will govern what CIA interrogators can do to prisoners in secret. Those rules will set the standard not only for the CIA but also for what kind of treatment captured American soldiers can expect from their captors, now and in future wars. Before the president once again approves a policy of official cruelty, he should reflect on that.

It is time for us to remember who we are and approach this enemy with energy, judgment and confidence that we will prevail. That is the path to security, and back to ourselves.

Charles C. Krulak was commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995 to 1999. Joseph P. Hoar was commander in chief of U.S. Central Command from 1991 to 1994.

What's really sad is that our nation behaved with more dignity when its existence was at stake. George Washington had a better grip on what makes America special than any of today's torture cheerleaders.

The founders understood this argument. Its preeminent proponent was George Washington himself. As historian David Hackett Fischer memorably recounts in his 2004 book, Washington's Crossing: "Always some dark spirits wished to visit the same cruelties on the British and Hessians that had been inflicted on American captives. But Washington's example carried growing weight, more so than his written orders and prohibitions. He often reminded his men that they were an army of liberty and freedom, and that the rights of humanity for which they were fighting should extend even to their enemies. ... Even in the most urgent moments of the war, these men were concerned about ethical questions in the Revolution."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur's Article

Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.

---

Wow. Sounds like a throwback straight to the Spanish Inquisition. Maybe this sounds crazy, but perhaps we should be less worried about obtaining confessions and more about obtaining reliable information. Or maybe we're just looking for someone to blame and punish, instead of looking to protect American lives.

Ajax

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

Sheesh, that almost has me rooting for the terrorists...

---

Yeah, wow...that is worth joining in sympathy with terrorists. Nice perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajax

Wow. Sounds like a throwback straight to the Spanish Inquisition.

---

Yeah thats soooo close the Spanish Inquisition. Lets get a little more loose and fast with comparisons. We should just state that we are more like the Nazi's rounding up peace loving Muslims for eventual cremation. :dizzy2:

The article written is of a slant when it states the obtaining of confessions, its called critical thinking. This was the MO of the SI, but there, in the popularized cases you were facing death either way, confession or not. But yes, this is the same thing...pleeeeaaase.

Seriously why do you think we use methods to bring about quick determinations of whether or not a person has information? Do you think we just might have enough intelligence to determine the cred of intelligence gathered? You'll have to think and not just read drive by articles.

/sarcasm on

Personally, just to satisfy you tin hatters and the "that terrorist is just a freedom fighter" crowd, we should put some on a slow burn rack...thats what you want right? I mean if we're already compared to the SI with these benign practices, we might as well go all the way. If we're going to get wet waterboarding, might as well go swimming.

/sarcasm off

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Do you think we just might have enough intelligence to determine the cred of intelligence gathered?

---

Based on results so far . . . no. Torture is a terrible way to obtain reliable information. AFAIC, its only effective use is obtaining confessions, hence the comparison to the SI. If we want to accomplish something other than making ourselves feel powerful and making others hate us, we're going to need to improve our methods.

Ajax

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Yeah, wow...that is worth joining in sympathy with terrorists. Nice perspective.

---

The terrorists are arguably morally superior at this point. They tend to leave women and children alone.


The second quote wasn't mine BTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

The terrorists are arguably morally superior at this point. They tend to leave women and children alone.

---

I don't think the terrorists are being particularly discriminate when they set off car bombs in markets, crash planes into buildings, etc. We are still morally superior to them.

As I have stated before, I would have no issue if every terrorist were herded together and dropped in a meat grinder. I would dance a little happy dance. My concern is what torture does to us. We sacrifice all sorts of things, and gain so little.

Terrorists leave women and children alone, huh? Yeah, cause they use those car bombs that know not to blow up kids. And those guys that blow up teenagers in Tel Aviv discos, they know to only blow up the kids over 18?

The big problem I have with torture is nobody is willing to declare what is and isn't torture. Sure, we can all stand around and say "Torture is bad". The problem is, torture means different things to different people.

Not allowing somebody conjugal visits is considered torture by the ACLU. Personally, I'm not up nights over that one. By the same token, jamming bamboo under somebody's fingernails doesn't cause any permanent harm either, and I think we can all agree that shouldn't be allowed...

Even the term 'causing moderate amounts of pain' is a subjective statement. What if the prisoners aren't getting air conditioning? In many ways, that can make you more uncomfortable than sleep depravation, but I'd hardly categorize it as torture. Then again, keeping somebody naked in a 50 degree room and splashing water on them does seem pretty harsh, especially if they don't have a doctor around to watch for hypothermia.

I guess my point is I stand between both sides in this one. On one side, there's a large group of you that seems to want to declare anything the US does to people in it's custody as torture. On the other, there seems to be a large group content to cause pain and terror, so long as no lasting physical harm is inflicted.

I don't want to be part of either group.

And for the record, there are some innocents being held at Gitmo. Many of them are there because the US went into Pakistan and offered bounties of $10K US to the locals to point out who the Al-Queda members were. Not exactly a foolproof method, me thinks.

At this stage of the game, i don't understand why we can't hold tribunals or do something. Many of those being held don't even know the charges against them. Habeus corpus seems like a pretty big give-back. Personally, I'm not happy with the precedent that we can just suspend it whenever things get tough.

the truth of the effectiveness of torture is obvious to those with an open mind.

those who have already decided it is better to become a barbarian, than be the victim of one, will never see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Terrorists leave women and children alone, huh? Yeah, cause they use those car bombs that know not to blow up kids. And those guys that blow up teenagers in Tel Aviv discos, they know to only blow up the kids over 18?

---

Like US bombs never hurt women or children...

They don't target them specifically at least.

And learn to recognize a hyperbole people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaxfetish

Based on results so far . . . no. Torture is a terrible way to obtain reliable information. AFAIC, its only effective use is obtaining confessions, hence the comparison to the SI. If we want to accomplish something other than making ourselves feel powerful and making others hate us, we're going to need to improve our methods.

---

We do have intelligence assets around the globe that collect information independent of interrogation of prisoners. This is used to determine the cred of intelligence gathered via interrogation. To think that we just poke some Islamic fundamentalist with a stick and then take what he says to make us stop as gospel is less than accurate and I find you a more intelligent individual than this so it puzzles me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

The terrorists are arguably morally superior at this point. They tend to leave women and children alone.

---

If this wasn't so tragic, it'd be sig worthy. You can't get your terrorist membership card without wanting to purposely murder civilians of any age or gender that have zero military significance in an effort to invoke terror. Please spare me any tin hat comparisons to our military operations as that would invoke a distinctions of naivety paramount only to American pilots bombing pearl harbor.

-edit- Well you made that reference but qualified it at least -end edit-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

The second quote wasn't mine BTW.

---

Fixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

If this wasn't so tragic, it'd be sig worthy. You can't get your terrorist membership card without wanting to purposely murder civilians of any age or gender that have zero military significance in an effort to invoke terror. Please spare me any tin hat comparisons to our military operations as that would invoke a distinctions of naivety paramount only to American pilots bombing pearl harbor.

---

They're indiscriminate when it comes to bombings, with the kidnappings they usually release the women first and unharmed.
They're bombing places with lots of people, including women and children, that's something entirely different from actually cutting their heads off.

Of course, I wouldn't claim the average American has less morals than the average terrorist, but comparing terrorists to the Bush administration, I might occasionally have my doubts...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barocca

the truth of the effectiveness of torture is obvious to those with an open mind.

---

I bet you could get just about anyone's MAC pin# out of them in 5 minutes or less with waterboarding.

"Torture" can and does yield useful information- it's all about asking the right questions. Saying it can't yield accurate information shouldn't even be part of the argument. Vague and open-ended questions will lead to trouble, pointed and verifiable questions can yield useful intel if done right. I'm no interrogator or intelligence officer, but I'm able to work that much out on my own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I'd just like to add that it's now clear that General David Petraeus, commander of the combined forces in Iraq, is clearly a terrorist-coddling defeat monkey, since he has this to say about the use of torture:

---

He has to, and should say this. Soldiers in the field need to hear their commander telling them unequivocally that unnecessary violence towards prisoners or civilians is unacceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

The terrorists are arguably morally superior at this point. They tend to leave women and children alone.

---

What an astonishing statement.

Quote:

---

The four unidentified men and the boy were found during raids against an al Qaeda network in Garma, about 30 km (20 miles) west of Baghdad in Anbar province, a Sunni Arab insurgency stronghold.

They were found inside a padlocked room and had been beaten with chains, cables and hoses, the U.S military said in a statement.

"The boy stated the terrorists had hooked electrical wires to his tongue and shocked him," it said. It did not give the boy's age.

"The hostages indicated their captors were foreign fighters who spoke with different accents."

All five were from different tribes, the military said, but no other details were available. They would receive medical treatment and then be handed over to tribal leaders.

---

http://lite.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L21661229.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

"Torture" can and does yield useful information- it's all about asking the right questions. Saying it can't yield accurate information shouldn't even be part of the argument. Vague and open-ended questions will lead to trouble, pointed and verifiable questions can yield useful intel if done right. I'm no interrogator or intelligence officer, but I'm able to work that much out on my own.

---

So you are in favor of torture, so long as it's done right. Astonishing faith you have in our government when it comes to such issues.

What evidence do you have that interrogations are conducted with such delicate sense of appropriate application? None of the evidence supports such a conclusion. Account after account coming out of our system shows open-ended questions, forced confessions (many later contradicted by evidence) and in notable cases, death due to interrogation. What makes Xiahou think that every interrogator in every black box prison is another Xiahou?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

We do have intelligence assets around the globe that collect information independent of interrogation of prisoners. This is used to determine the cred of intelligence gathered via interrogation. To think that we just poke some Islamic fundamentalist with a stick and then take what he says to make us stop as gospel is less than accurate and I find you a more intelligent individual than this so it puzzles me.

---

I'm all for using those intelligence assets independent of interrogation. I'm all for interrogation, and I don't suggest we coddle our interrogatees. But I think there's a distinction to be made between interrogation and torture, I don't trust torture, and I don't like what torture does either to those who commit it or those who suffer it. I especially think it's counterproductive in a war against an ideology, where we're trying to earn the trust and friendship of the other side so they won't want to blow us up. Having your countrymen tortured by Americans, I imagine, would only make someone want to blow Americans up all the more.

Ajax

Whether it is being done right or should be done at all is a separate point. I'm just dismissing the idea that it can't yield useful information. Historically speaking- it can, it has, and it will continue to do so. Of course it can get bad information too, especially if done "wrong"- but so can every intelligence gathering method.

Quote:

---

"Torture" can and does yield useful information- it's all about asking the right questions. Saying it can't yield accurate information shouldn't even be part of the argument. Vague and open-ended questions will lead to trouble, pointed and verifiable questions can yield useful intel if done right. I'm no interrogator or intelligence officer, but I'm able to work that much out on my own.

---

Thats interesting ....I certainly don't feel bad that KSM was waterboarded and gave up valuable info as a result.
errrrr..,....thats the bloke with the valuable info that he planned every terrorist attack ever undertaken in his lifetime isn't it .
That people can support and try and justify this barbarism is a very sad statement about the human race , an absolutely sickening statement in fact .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Thats interesting ....I certainly don't feel bad that KSM was waterboarded and gave up valuable info as a result.
errrrr..,....thats the bloke with the valuable info that he planned every terrorist attack ever undertaken in his lifetime isn't it .
That people can support and try and justify this barbarism is a very sad statement about the human race , an absolutely sickening statement in fact .

---

Lets play Where's Waldo and find the inaccuracies and lack of integrity in this post. I find that that people can support and try and justify this glossing over and reinventing of fact as a very sad statement of the human race, an absolutely sickening statemement in fact.

Shades if you support torture and abuse you are no different from those who associate with bin-laden .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Shades if you support torture and abuse you are no different from those who associate with bin-laden

---

What do you mean by this statement? What specific actions qualify as 'torture' in your book? Are Shades and I on the same level as bin-Laden's :daisy: if we agree the prison has the right to keep them in solitary confinement, a practice some define as torture? I'm asking you... what is torture in your book?

This has often proven to be a contentious debate, but there is still the need to be civil and refrain from personal attacks.

Thank you kindly.

:bow:

Sorry, I didn't know that word I used that got flowered was a cussword. What does it mean? I thought it meant henchmen or lackey...

By the way, do you mind when we use :daisy: ourselves in a manner that makes it clear we intended a 'colorful expression'?

you will not get my MAC pin out of me EVER, because i refuse to memorise it,
you WILL get a fake MAC pin out of me simply to stop the pain.

reliability of intel retrieved from torturing me = zero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barocca

you will not get my MAC pin out of me EVER, because i refuse to memorise it,
you WILL get a fake MAC pin out of me simply to stop the pain.

reliability of intel retrieved from torturing me = zero.

---

After trying the pin number we'd know it was or wasn't false, but on the chance that it was correct you're alive and so are we.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Sorry, I didn't know that word I used that got flowered was a cussword. What does it mean? I thought it meant henchmen or lackey...

---

It means a foul or contemptible person. The second syllable derives from exactly the word it looks like and means much the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

By the way, do you mind when we use :daisy: ourselves in a manner that makes it clear we intended a 'colorful expression'?

---

Not at all. The forum rules on swearing indicate that if the word is fully blanked out (by asterisks for example) it is permissible to "colour" one's posts. I thought the :daisy: was a gentler way of editing language that was not permissible than sending alerts and warnings - unless the language used was inflammatory or particularly bad, in which case they still follow.

If members want to use it as a replacement for asterisks, that's fine by me. Of course, we'd all prefer that recourse to colourful metaphor was kept to a minimum, since this is a PG site.

Forgive the intermission. I return you to the discussion at hand.

:bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Shades if you support torture and abuse you are no different from those who associate with bin-laden .

---

By making that comparison you show your cards perfectly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

After trying the pin number we'd know it was or wasn't false, but on the chance that it was correct you're alive and so are we.

---

but you cannot get information from me that I DO NOT KNOW

it dont matter how many times you come back and beat the tar out of me i simply DO NOT KNOW

each and every time i will tell you something you want to hear simply to stop the pain

that is why torture is not and can never be reliable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barocca

but you cannot get information from me that I DO NOT KNOW

it dont matter how many times you come back and beat the tar out of me i simply DO NOT KNOW

each and every time i will tell you something you want to hear simply to stop the pain

that is why torture is not and can never be reliable.

---

You assume universal ignorance amongst those tortured and a complete lack of collaborating and supporting intelligence prior to and independant of questioning.