Can We Call It Torture Now?

By Jeralyn, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 09:46:19 AM EST
Tags: CIA, torture (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The House Intelligence Committee's 6,300 page report remains classified, but the Washington Post has details.

1. The CIA lied to Congress
2. More "enhanced interrogation techniques" were used than previously disclosed
3. The torture techniques did not result in valuable information

Via NY Magazine:

One previously undisclosed technique involved the the CIA dunking detainees in tubs of ice water in a method similar to waterboarding. Khalid Sheik Mohammed's nephew, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali [aka Ammar al-Baluchi] was subjected to it at a CIA black site near Kabul in 2003. According to the Post, "CIA interrogators forcibly kept his head under the water while he struggled to breathe and beat him repeatedly, hitting him with a truncheon-like object and smashing his head against a wall, officials said." He is still in Guantanamo Bay.

[More...]

Another example from the Post:

a former CIA interrogator named Charlie Wise was forced to retire in 2003 after being suspected of abusing Abu Zubaida using a broomstick as a ballast while he was forced to kneel in a stress position. Wise was also implicated in the abuse at Salt Pit. He died of a heart attack shortly after retiring from the CIA, former U.S. intelligence officials said.

Politico reports Sen. Feinstein says there will be a vote Thursday on whether to release the 400 page summary of the report.

President Bush in 2007:

"This government does not torture people."

Another Bush lie:

"The techniques that we use have been fully disclosed to appropriate members of the United States Congress."

Dick Cheney said last week:

“If I would have to do it all over again, I would,” Cheney said. “The results speak for themselves.”

< Monday Open Thread | Pew Report: Support for Death Penalty Decreases to Lowest Level >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Can We Call It Torture Now? | 56 comments (56 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Results (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by squeaky on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 10:26:01 AM EST

"The results speak for themselves."

Yes, now there is an indelible stain on all Americans. Maybe we should redesign the US flag, featuring a big stain, in order to honor Cheney's legacy.

As much as I find his legacy torturous (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by jondee on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 10:37:47 AM EST

the torturing didn't start with Cheney, the Mayberry Machievellis, and the neocons.

Google the history of rendition, the School of the Americas, and Operation Phoenix for starters.


: You're right. Rendition was proceding apace (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by Mr Natural on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 11:04:16 AM EST

under Clinton.

: SOA etc (none / 0) (#16)
by squeaky on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:55:29 PM EST

Yes we have a long history of war atrocities, but Cheney, as Chair of BushCO, not only borrowed and refined Gestapo techniques, but is proud of his evil deeds and would do it again.
They took it all to a different level. John Yoo redefining torture?
BushCo took US atrocities to an entirely new level and did everything they could to institutionalize them, imo.

I'm just speechless. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by lilburro on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 03:44:05 PM EST

We were right about anything, but nothing will be done.

"While the 6300 page (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by KeysDan on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 07:46:41 PM EST

report (Senate Intelligence Committee) remains classified, on Monday, US officials described its contents in detail to the Washington Post." Unidentified US officials leaked details of the classified report to the Washington Post. Is this a good leak or a bad one? If the later, what does this mean for Jeff Bezos for publishing this classified material? Will his spouse be subject to search and detention if she transfers through Heathrow?

All documented in Jane Mayer's 2008 book, (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by Mr Natural on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 11:04:04 PM EST

The Dark Side, which I read after finding it remaindered for $3.99. My point is that if you want to know how much people value something, in this case uncomfortable truths, find out what they're willing to pay for it.

: Exactly. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by ruffian on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 11:23:13 PM EST

I guess the news here is Congress admitting what we all knew a long time ago.

Slippery Cheney. (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by lentinel on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:09:13 AM EST

"If I would have to do it all over again, I would," Cheney said. "The results speak for themselves."

He also acknowledged that he and W. authorized waterboarding.

That conflicts with W.'s oft stated lie that we do not torture.

Cheney "resolves" the situation by saying that waterboarding is not torture.

So - we did what we did, but we didn't do what we did.

And these two birds are still free - while people who puff on a flower are in jail.

Will they be allowed an indefinite pass - or will the present government finally have the integrity to bring them to justice on behalf of the American people whom they so forcefully betrayed?

If congressional (none / 0) (#4)
by Mikado Cat on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 08:56:05 PM EST

intelligence committees were not adequately informed, doesn't most of the blame for that fall on them directly?

CIA is like a snake, no point in blaming them for acting like a snake, its the obligation of oversight to handle them so they do what we want.

Bashing Bush and Cheney seems like the usual bashing, nothing new.

I hear that... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by kdog on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 08:16:05 AM EST

I don't care if you're a senator or a street-sweeper, if you expect the CIA to do anything but lie to you, you're a damn fool. We f*ckin' pay them to lie, mislead, and torture.


: ..and look after the interests (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by jondee on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 10:53:24 AM EST

of the "too big to fail", which they've been doing since the company started being run by Wall St shylocks like the Dulles brothers.

There (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by lentinel on Thu Apr 03, 2014 at 05:40:30 AM EST

has been far too little bashing of Bush and Cheney - especially from our current government.

Bush is treated with honor and respect by our current president.
Cheney is accorded fawning attention by our media.

Going back aways, I remember the campaign of 2004 when Kerry and Edwards were given the opportunity to rid the country of those scoundrels.

Here was Kerry, faced with the biggest liar and worse president in our history - and he couldn't say anything. Of course, he was protecting his own keister because he supported Bush's wars. He had the choice of either revealing himself as a dupe, (not good politically) - or trying to defend his actions. It didn't fly. just as it didn't work for Hillary in 2008.

Here was Kerry - and he couldn't bring himself to say to a national audience that his opponent had deliberately lied to the American people to get us into two wars. So he mumbled about Tora Bora and let that sleezebag Bush off the hook.

And there was Edwards. The poverty tour guy. What a phony if ever there was. He's faced with Gargoyle Cheney. And he couldn't confront him either. He winds up praising Cheney as a loving father.

Let me outta here!

Isn't there anybody in politics willing to tell it like it T-I-is?

This is why I sometimes try to urge people to watch and listen to Malcolm X.

This is the way, imo, an honest politician sounds.
And, the man is brilliant.

We need someone like him in government.


No surprise at all (none / 0) (#12)
by Dadler on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 11:48:35 AM EST

Whom do you think peoples these institutions of torture? The most sadistic and psychologically ignorant folks, with the most deluded notions of their own superpowers. And, more sadly, the average American will easily be convinced that thugging it up with them ter'ists is the best way, evidence be damned. This is the chief problem here: vengeance is a overwhelmingly powerful urge in human beings.

: Vengeance coupled with fear.... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by ruffian on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 11:56:21 AM EST

Nearly unstoppable. How anyone can sing 'home of the brave' with a straight face is beyond me.

Call it what you want (none / 0) (#14)
by Mikado Cat on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 03:11:54 PM EST

If its in the range of "torture" its among the mildest ever practiced. I don't think I know enough to make a firm judgement, nor do I think many others know enough.

I do think its a little nuts to assume we have a cadre of demons rather than fairly normal people in places like Guantanamo. Its one of the worst lies about things we don't like, that somehow it wasn't a "normal" person doing the stuff, when clearly the average person is capable of great cruelty under the right circumstances.

"We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

I think you need (5.00 / 5) (#15)
by sj on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 03:21:47 PM EST

empirical data:

If its in the range of "torture" its among the mildest ever practiced.

I'm sure you have some friends who could arrange for you to acquire that knowledge. You have a charming enough personality that I'm sure you have someone in your circle of friends who wouldn't mind doing this:

"CIA interrogators forcibly kept his head under the water while he struggled to breathe and beat him repeatedly, hitting him with a truncheon-like object and smashing his head against a wall, officials said." He is still in Guantanamo Bay.

Then you would be in a position to make that ridiculous comment. You might not be inclined to do so, however.


The sad (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by lentinel on Thu Apr 03, 2014 at 05:24:37 AM EST

truth is that fairly normal people can be trained to commit horrendous acts.

And we, as with the Germans in WW2, have gotten quite good at training these fairly normal people.

After the initial phase, torturing, beating, waterboarding, breaking limbs and the rest can apparently become quite enjoyable if one reads the anecdotal evidence of those who engaged in these activities.

One of the ways we justify ourselves is to think that we are morally superior to our adversaries.

But the simple truth is, imo, that people are the same all over.
With the proper indoctrination - skillful manipulation of loyalty and love feelings - ordinary people can be molded into monsters.

And if you think that waterboarding is not torture - or the daily beatings - the sleep deprivation followed by beatings are "mild", I really don't know what's wrong with you.


Compared to the ANC (none / 0) (#19)
by Mikado Cat on Thu Apr 03, 2014 at 09:05:49 PM EST

Soweto necklace, its as mild as it gets. Drowning is a routine part of Seal training, its worse after the first time. Its a very serious action, but I won't go so far as to say no one should ever be subjected to it, and that is the key, knowing all the details related to these accusations.

What I am hearing here seems mostly whining about the methods the rough men use to keep the posters safe in their own beds at night.


You may (none / 0) (#20)
by lentinel on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 02:52:12 AM EST

think that torturing people keeps you safe in your bed at night. I don't.

I think it makes ever more dangerous and determined enemies for us.

And there is the awful prospect that it gives license to our enemies to do that to our captives - and that we would have no grounds on which to protest their mistreatment.

When the towers were hit, the entire world was appalled. In France. In Canada. In Brazil. The Cuban foreign minister offered airspace and airports to American planes. Chinese and Iranian officials sent their condolences.

Now, I don't know if anyone would give a damn.


What I am hearing ... (none / 0) (#21)
by Yman on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 06:46:56 AM EST

What I am hearing here seems mostly whining about the methods the rough men use to keep the posters safe in their own beds at night.

... is someone quoting a Washington Times film critic to rationalize the use of torture while insulting those who challenge it.

BTW - Who do you think is responsible for that quote, and were they referring to "rough men" who were willing to fight for their country or willing to torture captives?


Then you are (none / 0) (#22)
by MKS on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 08:09:03 AM EST

advocating torture--even if it is the selective use of torture.

That is evil. When we, the good guys, torture, we cease being the good guys.


Baloney (none / 0) (#26)
by Mikado Cat on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 06:30:06 AM EST

Obama kills by the missile load, those who were "tortured" are still alive, and just fine.

Nothing that reasonable people would need to know, is publicly known. Not the exact procedures, not the people they were done to, not the reason it was used, or information gained or hoped to be gained, just a little redacted partisan leaks.

Drowning is a horrible experience, but not a great safety risk, or with long term health issues. Since you are gungho about calling it torture, what sort of information extraction measure do you consider not torture?


"Just fine?" (5.00 / 2) (#27)
by Anne on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 08:07:54 AM EST

By whose definition - yours? Or for you, is it just so simple that being alive = being fine?

Reading your justifications and rationales for why it's okay to torture people makes me feel like Dick Cheney just dropped by for a chat. The man who gives me the distinct impression that he takes almost as much satisfaction from authorizing others to engage in torture as he might have had he been able to exact it himself.

Here's the thing, for me, anyway. The problem with those who rationalize torture be used for those they deem unworthy of humane treatment is that they never consider the possibility that one day, those who make those kinds of decisions will broaden their definitions, that it will get easier to lower the bar, that that mindset will begin to invade the domestic arena. I mean, why should the military have all the fun - why not let the police get in on the action?

I think the argument could be made that we have seen that, which means that it's no longer a case of us feeling safe in our beds because all that nastiness is happening on the military front, it's a case of wondering whether, if we're stopped by the police, it could happen to us. I can't speak for you, but I don't want to be on the receiving end of a police justification for inhumane treatment, but perhaps, if it were to happen to you, you'd just be grateful they were doing their jobs and that you came out of it alive.

As far as I'm concerned, those who justify torture are no different than those who order it, supervise it or carry it out; you make it possible for torture to remain a viable option for whatever purpose the torturers dream up. You may think you're just sitting on the sidelines, removed from the reality of torture, but as long as you continue to justify it, you're right in the middle of it.

I don't know how you can sleep at night.


I don't believe in inhumane (none / 0) (#29)
by Mikado Cat on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 06:35:56 PM EST

treatment, certainly not pointless cruelty. I am not so naive that putting the "tag" of torture on a procedure puts it in the same range as torture as practiced by the rest of the world.

Like it or not you are responsible for the people our country sends out to do the dirty work. If it was really a high priority even a fairly small number of people could make changes, but clearly its a talking or whining point.

Bush dunked people under water.
Obama kills them and their families with drones.


Bush did BOTH (none / 0) (#34)
by Yman on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 08:17:57 AM EST

Bush dunked people under water.
Obama kills them and their families with drones.

... and refresh my recollection ... which ones were captives, again?


Bush did do both (none / 0) (#40)
by Mikado Cat on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:04:42 AM EST

Obama made the political choice to kill instead of capture.


You (none / 0) (#43)
by lentinel on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:04:34 AM EST

can't be naive enough to think that prisoners didn't die under the treatment accorded them by that great painter, Bush.

Or by the bombings initiated by him either.

How many died just during "shock and awe"?


Do tell (none / 0) (#45)
by Yman on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:57:48 AM EST

What made Obama' s decision "political" (particularly as opposed to Bush's use of drones) and when could he have captured them, instead? Be specific ... This should be good.


Dead people (none / 0) (#53)
by Mikado Cat on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 11:53:46 PM EST

don't complain about their treatment. Obama rather than take the heat of putting more people in some prison, made the political choice to kill instead of capture.


: So the short answer is ... (none / 0) (#54)
by Yman on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 06:12:18 AM EST

... never, and you have no evidence to support your claim that the decision was political ..
... as usual.

"Whining" (none / 0) (#23)
by MKS on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 08:11:11 AM EST

about torture....

I could not disagree with you more. The rationalizations you use are evil.


How about a terrified child (none / 0) (#24)
by jondee on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 08:51:15 AM EST

dying slowly under a pile of rubble after an aerial bombardment? Would that qualify as torture?

As Sartre said, the worst has already happened. And people in this country still want to wax nostalgic and poetic about WW2..

Many in this country are deeply delusional about what has always been required in the service of "protecting our interests abroad". A little graft, a little repression, a little murder, a little torture..


: "A little repression, a little torture," (none / 0) (#25)
by Mr Natural on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 10:57:13 AM EST

Sooner or later, you have real authoritarianism.

The techniques used just (5.00 / 2) (#28)
by MO Blue on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 12:19:37 PM EST

give people like you "thrills and chills" by allowing you to engage vicariously in these "rough men" techniques. "Rough men" right out of fictional novels on the subject and right up your alley.

From the actual reports they did little or nothing to keep us safe in our beds.

overstating the significance of plots and prisoners, and taking credit for critical pieces of intelligence that detainees had in fact surrendered before they were subjected to harsh techniques.

Let's review the information contained in that excerpt, shall we. The critical pieces of intelligence were surrendered prior to the use of torture.

excruciating interrogation methods that yielded little,if any, significant intelligence, according to U.S. officials who have reviewed the document.

Why is this (none / 0) (#30)
by Mikado Cat on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 06:44:55 PM EST

report being considered as gospel?

Grow up and open your eyes, adults are doing serious things. Obama has a stooge running the CIA, the report will say whatever the big O wants. Spontaneous uprising about a movie, sure boss.


You would surely qualify as an expert (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by MO Blue on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 07:09:33 PM EST

on stooges who cannot be trusted to tell the truth in any situation. You couldn't rely on facts rather than the fiction that you create if your life depended on it.

Yes, people have been doing serious things. The U.S. torturing detainees is a very serious thing and is against international law.

You somehow think that sanctioning torture makes you a grown up. I don't agree. I think it makes you a very poor excuse for a human being.


How much of an expert is needed (none / 0) (#38)
by Mikado Cat on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 06:45:58 AM EST

to understand that Obama killing people, and all the innocents in a perimeter around them when the missile hits, is worse than dunking someone in water?


: You seem to be under the impression (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by Anne on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:16:29 AM EST

that the report concerns the events at Benghazi, when in fact, it does not; it has to do with the CIA's interrogation program:

A report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concludes that the CIA misled the government and the public about aspects of its brutal interrogation program for years -- concealing details about the severity of its methods, overstating the significance of plots and prisoners, and taking credit for critical pieces of intelligence that detainees had in fact surrendered before they were subjected to harsh techniques.
The report, built around detailed chronologies of dozens of CIA detainees, documents a long-standing pattern of unsubstantiated claims as agency officials sought permission to use -- and later tried to defend -- excruciating interrogation methods that yielded little, if any, significant intelligence, according to U.S. officials who have reviewed the document.
This is why people are talking about torture, not drone killings - because torture is the subject of the report.
No one is saying killing people w