Torture Techniques Revealed at Gitmo

[doc_bean]

Sure, if they applied. I can't go shoot up a Russian military base and expect them.

Well technically, it would be exquivalent to the Russian coming to the US, blowing stuff up, you taking you gun, firing at them and then getting captured and taken to Russia.

Not quite the same situation. While I don't want to argue about the validity of the war in Afghanistan, the US was still the invading force, and a lot of people attacking US soldiers where doing so to protect themselves and/or their family and/or their assest, or at least believed they needed to be protected against 'the americans'.

[English assassin]

Most if not all people there can be considered guilty. You don't capture someone shooting and launching RPGs at you and say: "Wait! He needs a fair trial!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
He needs the Geneva conventions, not a fair trial....

Sure, if they applied. I can't go shoot up a Russian military base and expect them.

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. EITHER he is a combatant, in which case he needs the geneva convention, OR he is a criminal, in which case he needs a fair trial. There is no third way.

When we caught people shooting and launching RPGs at British troops in Northern ireland a fair trial is EXACTLY what we gave them*

*with the occasional unfair one thrown in just so Michael Mansfield QC could make some wedge

[CrossLOPER]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272492,00.html

WASHINGTON — An accused enemy combatant held at Guantanamo Bay told a military hearing he was physically as well as mentally tortured there by having to read a newsletter full of 'crap,' being forced to use unscented deodorant and shampoo and having to play sports with a ball that would not bounce.

Khan told an April 15 hearing called to determine whether he was rightly classified as an "enemy combatant" that he also had his baby pictures taken from him, that cleaners left marks on his cell walls and that detainees have no DVD players or other entertainment.


This is simply outrageous. I've long taken a hard line with the terrorists in Gitmo, but unscented deodorant? No DVD players? Shoddy maid services!?! WHAT?? Torturous techniques such as this cannot be tolerated in our Republic!

And if it wasnt evidently clear... with a bit of..

The suicide rate and prior documentation of violations say a little bit more.
\
Look! He's washing his hair with the crappy shampoo!

EDIT: /alfnsnglngdsnb;lnb;ldnbnb

[Vladimir]

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. EITHER he is a combatant, in which case he needs the geneva convention, OR he is a criminal, in which case he needs a fair trial. There is no third way.

When we caught people shooting and launching RPGs at British troops in Northern ireland a fair trial is EXACTLY what we gave them*

*with the occasional unfair one thrown in just so Michael Mansfield QC could make some wedge

There is a difference between legal and illegal combatants. The former is covered and the latter is not. Once their legitimacy is verified then the conventions can be applied. If they are illegal combatants, then they are just criminals.

The only reason war isn't considered a crime is because it's waged by people in authority. For those of you who don't know, authority is simply the legitimate use of force. How legitimacy is determined is very important and nebulous.

The situation in Ireland is/was far different from the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Grey_Fox]

The situation in Ireland is/was far different from the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan.

How so? Occupying force being fought by a guerrilla force that also had a penchant for shooting unarmed civilians in both cases. As far as I can see the only difference is what happens after they are captured.

[English assassin]

There is a difference between legal and illegal combatants. The former is covered and the latter is not. Once their legitimacy is verified then the conventions can be applied. If they are illegal combatants, then they are just criminals

Exactly. And what do we do with criminals?

My Lord, the prosecution rests.

The only reason war isn't considered a crime is because it's waged by people in authority.

Yes

For those of you who don't know, authority is simply the legitimate lawful use of force. How legitimacy legality is determined is very important and nebulous.

Mildly fixed. Its not nebulous at all. The law of war is long established, and there are good legal careers to be had in the armed forces.

[Rodion Romanovich]

This Fox news article sounds quite a lot like the type of information nazi Germany leaked about their "peaceful camps for dangerous criminals and terrorists" That people can be gullible enough for such propaganda to work over and over again in history...

[Tribesman]

Most if not all people there can be considered guilty.

How come most people there are eventually released without charge then ?

You don't capture someone shooting and launching RPGs at you and say: "Wait! He needs a fair trial!"

Ah the old fallacy that people in Gitmo were captured under arms fighting in Afghanistan .

Naive.

are you describing your own views very accurately?

When we caught people shooting and launching RPGs at British troops in Northern ireland a fair trial is EXACTLY what we gave them*

Yep , but don't forget that when the Gitmo approach was used it turned out to be a complete disaster .

[Watchman]

Sure, if they applied. I can't go shoot up a Russian military base and expect them.

Of course not. Russia runs under "sovereign justice" these days, after all.

[Zaknafien]

I think its disgusting that fake-news outlets like Fox are putting out stories like this to desensitize the whole torture and illegal imprisonment issue at gitmo. The propaganda machine is in full spin here and most Americans eat it up and laugh it off. Just look at the applause at the republican debate about torturing people... WTF?

by the way, hey PJ, its me Al from the Pond :)

[Redleg]

Well technically, it would be exquivalent to the Russian coming to the US, blowing stuff up, you taking you gun, firing at them and then getting captured and taken to Russia.

Not exactly. The individual would have to have been from say Canada or Mexico.

Not quite the same situation. While I don't want to argue about the validity of the war in Afghanistan, the US was still the invading force, and a lot of people attacking US soldiers where doing so to protect themselves and/or their family and/or their assest, or at least believed they needed to be protected against 'the americans'.

Some that are held in Gitmo might fit that catergory but the majority should be those who are not native citizens of Afganstan. Now the problem that we all face is that we don't know the full story, to much is being left out, and then there is the futher mudding of the waters of prisoners not being captured in Afganstan or Iraq. If such prisoners exist then the United States is clearly in the wrong.

[Strike For The South]

So as long as we have the same veiw on Human rights as Russia were ok? Thats like saying our economys like Sierra Leones I think were on the right track.

[Redleg]

So as long as we have the same veiw on Human rights as Russia were ok? Thats like saying our economys like Sierra Leones I think were on the right track.

Never stated such a thing. try again or point out who you were directing your statement toward

[Strike For The South]

Sure, if they applied. I can't go shoot up a Russian military base and expect them.

Even if these men are illegal combatants why torture them? Doesnt that make us just as bad as the people we are figthing? I thought we were doing this to eradicate horrible people who dont respect basic human rights but its ok for us to do it if there "illegal" combatants? .

[Zaknafien]

the time when America stood for liberty and justice for the world is long over, now we're simply a force for mercantilism and imperialist oppression. Its up to patriotic citizens to reclaim our republic and change the epoch to the country's founding ideals.

[doc_bean]

Some that are held in Gitmo might fit that catergory but the majority should be those who are not native citizens of Afganstan.

Not something I've heard (often) before. Do you happen to have proof of this ?

[Redleg]

Not something I've heard (often) before. Do you happen to have proof of this ?

Just some information from globalsecurity.org that I would like to believe is correct. Again in the absence of real facts I am hestiant to reach a firm conclusion about Gitmo any longer. Several detainee's have been shown to have been brought in from outside Afganstan and Iraq.

However here is the statement I was refering to.

According to one report, to qualify for transfer and detention at Camp Delta, Guantanamo, prisoners taken in Afghanistan must meet any one of the following criteria:

Be a foreign national;
Have received training from Al-Qaeda; or
Be in command of 300 or more personnel

[Zaknafien]

hm, just from personal experience in Afghanistan I can attest that battalions are pressured to create a plausible story for each candidate for detention in order to "send them away". I know of many such detainees that were sent to the BTIF and later to Camp Delta on less than solid reasons, and a true lack of anything we in the western world call "evidence".

[Redleg]

hm, just from personal experience in Afghanistan I can attest that battalions are pressured to create a plausible story for each candidate for detention in order to "send them away". I know of many such detainees that were sent to the BTIF and later to Camp Delta on less than solid reasons, and a true lack of anything we in the western world call "evidence".

Then as a soldier you should provide evidence to Congress - via your congressman that illegal activities are being conducted. By not doing so you are complaciant in any illegal activity.

But then plausible implies a believable theory - so which one is it - is it completely made up or is it at least plausible evidence that would support an initial charge?

You can't have it both ways if your directly involved in the situation. ITs either one or the other.

[Lemur]

If anyone actually cares, the techniques used in "enhanced interrogation" have been documented. Extensively. And these are the approved ones, not even touching on some of the weird stuff going down in places like Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.

The CIA sources described a list of six "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" instituted in mid-March 2002 and used, they said, on a dozen top al Qaeda targets incarcerated in isolation at secret locations on military bases in regions from Asia to Eastern Europe. According to the sources, only a handful of CIA interrogators are trained and authorized to use the techniques:

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

2. 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. 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.

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. 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 leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess.

"The person believes they are being killed, and as such, it really amounts to a mock execution, which is illegal under international law," said John Sifton of Human Rights Watch.

[ShadeHonestus]

Suicide rate: at the WTC 9/11 100%

Their treatment of prisoners: Beheading


If waterboarding stops another 9/11 or reveals the location of the prisoners before they are beheaded then I'll personally handle the cellophane. Of course people will argue that waterboarding will cause an increase in both of the above, but since 9/11 (and other attacks) and beheadings happened prior to the worldwide publication of interrogation technigues at Gitmo...I'd say the battle was joined from the other side prior and with vigor. If you say the above happened as a result of prior uses of these techniques then please provide the torture causation link to each act of violence in the name of Islamic Fundamentalism.

Of course it would be wonderful to rise above the situation and never commit "torture" no matter how benign, however in a country where people believe Bush choreographed 9/11 rising above would be seen as a failure in policy by those same people preaching our techniques as evil. Not to mention that rising above does not disarm or change the nature of our foe. We won't simply encounter a kinder gentler Islamo-Fascist committing PC acts of terror or take an olive branch approach to the West, moderates in the Middle East, or Israel.

There comes a time to wake up, grow up, recognize the fight we are in, the nature of those we take a stand against, the difference between our worst acts and what is common place for our foe. Of course we go ahead with accoutabilty for our actions to our populace with accountability politically worldwide while the accountabilty pined for by the adversary is to that which brings him virgins.

[AntiochusIII]

Yeah, but.

I'm going to pull a Tribesman here and, well, quote him.

How come most people there are eventually released without charge then ?

The whole "we must fight with two ready hands untied (this time!)" thing is cute and all in a let's-win-this-one kind of way but it really doesn't hold up to scrunity. [The US Government] is torturing people and quite likely at least a few innocent people. We make martyrs, sufferings, protestations, and hatreds out of desperation or perhaps even worse -- convenience. Didn't we have a thread around here that people are saying that one of the most chilling aspects of the Holocaust was that a civilized nation was doing it?

Did I win Godwin on this one?

[doc_bean]

If waterboarding stops another 9/11 or reveals the location of the prisoners before they are beheaded then I'll personally handle the cellophane.

Because terrorist organizations don't realize the importance of changing their plans when one of their own is captured and probably forced to confess ?

This is a pretty sick mentality, Hezbollah and Iran keep trying to get rid of Israel to avoid a second invasion of them (don't know how many people got killed by israel in those countries, probably more than 3000). Several terrorists are out to destroy the US to prevent whatever the US has done to them from happening again. And yes the US has done a lot of things to a lot of people, under all presidents.
This kind of thinking can only lead to a completely polarized world where the genocide of one of the parties will be the only means to completely end the conflict. But then a new conflict will inevitably arise and whole things will start all over again, until someone is both desperate and powerful enough to nuke the world to bits and kill us all.

In light of such an escalation (which is exactly what would happen following your mentality) I say, take the beating, accept the losses. Find the ones who did this to you and bring them to justice, don't antagonize an entire religion/race/part of the world because they will antagonize you.

[Zaknafien]

well, perhaps if we stopped making reasons for them to attack us they would quit. there not naturall 'evil' people you know. perhaps if we removed our hundreds of foreign military bases that constitute the global empire and quit allowing corproations to exploit the poor and hungry in almost every nation around the world, yeah, that might be a good start.

[Lemur]

If waterboarding stops another 9/11 or reveals the location of the prisoners before they are beheaded then I'll personally handle the cellophane.

Ah, yes, a variation of the Jack Bauer meme. You are making two honking big assumptions:

• Torture is more effective at eliciting valid intel than traditional means.
• Torture is being reserved for high-value al-Qaeda detainees.

Neither is demonstrably true.

well, perhaps if we stopped making reasons for them to attack us they would quit.

You do realize that Salafism is fundamentally offended by the west's success, right? As in, they'd love to get along with us, so long as they are supreme and we send them tribute, since that's the natural order of things.

Oh, and we would need to give them Spain back.

[Xiahou]

• Torture is more effective at eliciting valid intel than traditional means.
• Torture is being reserved for high-value al-Qaeda detainees.

Neither is demonstrably true.

What's more "traditional" than torture? As for effectiveness, the link you provided stated that it takes less than a minute to crack someone using waterboarding.

Something tells me waterboarding isn't at all common either- why would their be all the other "approved" techniques if it was? You'd just cut to the chase and use what works. They all sound pretty rough, but frankly, I'd be glad if I got off so easy if I were ever captured abroad by a Middle-Eastern government. At least I'd still have all my peices attached.

I certainly don't feel bad that KSM was waterboarded and gave up valuable info as a result.

[Petrus]

According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess.

I do not think this is true.

Waterboarding was heavily used by gestapo in France during WWII and if it gave results it was certainly not as efficient as the article suggests.

It looks like a justification to torture persons by giving torture an efficiency it doesn't have.

[Lemur]

What's more "traditional" than torture?

By "traditional," in this context, I was referring to the interrogation techniques that have traditionally been used by the U.S.A., especially in cases where we may want to bring criminal charges. The F.B.I. are the current masters of such techniques. The disagreement between the F.B.I. and the administration is well-documented.

There has long been a split between the FBI, which favors (and has long experience with) slower, more benign interview techniques, like establishing long-term, personal relationships between interrogator and subject. Responsibility for KSM was given to the CIA, which had much less experience with interrogations before 9/11, but was more gung-ho.

As for effectiveness, the link you provided stated that it takes less than a minute to crack someone using waterboarding.

Yes, it takes a very short time to reduce a detainee into a gibbering mess who will tell you anything to make the pain stop. This does not necessarily provide reliable or actionable intelligence.

If your goal is to break a person, torture is the most effective tool. If your goal is to subvert them or get them telling you everything you need to know, a softer touch has been proven more effective.

Substantiating this to your satisfaction is probably impossible, due to your tendency to declare almost any source to be "biased," and therefore beneath discussion.

Something tells me waterboarding isn't at all common either- why would their be all the other "approved" techniques if it was?

Actually, the techniques listed in the piece were approved years ago, and far more destructive methods of interrogation have been documented since. Your logical supposition does not match reality.

They all sound pretty rough, but frankly, I'd be glad if I got off so easy if I were ever captured abroad by a Middle-Eastern government. At least I'd still have all my peices attached.

So we now measure our moral rectitude against Syria and Egypt? They are the benchmarks for U.S. righteousness? Lovely.

I certainly don't feel bad that KSM was waterboarded and gave up valuable info as a result.

Implying that those who object to American torture are full of love and pity for KSM? Interesting. And what makes you think he gave up oodles of valuable intel?

It is clear, for instance, that Al Qaeda operations chief Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) was subjected to harsh interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. His interrogators even threatened, à la Jack Bauer, to go after his family. (KSM reportedly shrugged off the threat to his family—he would meet them in heaven, he said.) KSM did reveal some names and plots. But they haven’t panned out as all that threatening: one such plot was a plan by an Al Qaeda operative to cut down the Brooklyn Bridge—with a blow torch. Intelligence officials could never be sure if KSM was holding back on more serious threats, or just didn’t know of any.

[Lemur]

A conservative blogger put it better than I can:

Torture is wrong. The practice of extraordinary rendition began as a classic Clintonian hairsplitting exercise in the mid 1990s to avoid the clear letter of the laws which prohibit America from using torture. This is the kind of avoidance of the law and ridiculous semantics that we decried when employed by the Clinton adminstration. It has gotten no more attractive just because Bush has decided to continue the program.

We are torturing non-terrorists. Perhaps some people would be willing to torture Al Qaeda members. I'm not one of them, but perhaps some are. The problem with that mindset is that we aren't just torturing Al Qaeda members. It is becoming completely obvious that some of the people being tortured are innocent. See especially the ObsidianWings link above. That is crazy. There isn't any information we are getting that could possibly justify the torture of innocent people.

Torture is ineffective. Torture isn't ineffective at getting information per se. It is ineffective at geting useful information. That is because the victim either snaps completely, or starts trying to mold his story to fit what the torturer wants to hear. There is evidence that we have relied on information obtained through torture, only to find that it was very wrong.

Torture also opens us up to the legitmate criticism that we are acting out the very barbarism that we want to fight. I think as Republicans we have heard that charge so many times employed against practices where the analogy was completely inappropriate, that we have become inured to the charge when properly employed. This is a case where the charge has force. Go watch the Nick Berg Beheading Video and then imagine the blood pouring from his neck being just like the blood oozing from the fingers of an innocent torture victim sent to his fate by the CIA. That is the barbarism we are fighting, and that is the barbarism we must not become a part of. I know we have heard the charge that we are acting "just like them" thrown at us over trivial concerns like suggesting that we pay a bit more attention to visa-holders from other countries. This is NOT THAT CASE. This is the case of saying we are acting just like them because we are torturing people--acting just like them.

Therefore extraordinary rendition is a moral sinkhole, which is being employed on people we are not sure are guilty, and which doesn't even get good information. It cannot be continued.

[drone]

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.

Red-bellies are an approved form of torture? Are noogies, titty-twisters, and wedgies considered too harsh, or do they not produce results?