Posted on 10/21/2001 6:49:04 PM PDT by blam
MONDAY OCTOBER 22 2001
FBI considers torture as suspects stay silent
FROM DAMIAN WHITWORTH IN WASHINGTON
AMERICAN investigators are considering resorting to harsher interrogation techniques, including torture, after facing a wall of silence from jailed suspected members of Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network, according to a report yesterday. More than 150 people who were picked up after September 11 remain in custody, with four men the focus of particularly intense scrutiny. But investigators have found the usual methods have failed to persuade any of them to talk.
Options being weighed include “truth” drugs, pressure tactics and extraditing the suspects to countries whose security services are more used to employing a heavy-handed approach during interrogations.
“We’re into this thing for 35 days and nobody is talking. Frustration has begun to appear,” a senior FBI official told The Washington Post.
Under US law, evidence extracted using physical pressure or torture is inadmissible in court and interrogators could also face criminal charges for employing such methods. However, investigators suggested that the time might soon come when a truth serum, such as sodium pentothal, would be deemed an acceptable tool for interrogators.
The public pressure for results in the war on terrorism might also persuade the FBI to encourage the countries of suspects to seek their extradition, in the knowledge that they could be given a much rougher reception in jails back home.
One of the four key suspects is Zacarias Moussaoui, a French Moroccan, suspected of being a twentieth hijacker who failed to make it on board the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. Moussaoui was detained after he acted suspiciously at a Minnesota flying school, requesting lessons in how to steer a plane but not how to take off or land. Both Morocco and France are regarded as having harsher interrogation methods than the United States.
The investigators have been disappointed that the usual incentives to break suspects, such as promises of shorter sentences, money, jobs and new lives in the witness protection programme, have failed to break the silence.
“We are known for humanitarian treatment, so basically we are stuck. Usually there is some incentive, some angle to play, what you can do for them. But it could get to that spot where we could go to pressure . . . where we don’t have a choice, and we are probably getting there,” an FBI agent involved in the investigation told the paper.
The other key suspects being held in New York are Mohammed Jaweed Azmath and Ayub Ali Khan, Indians who were caught the day after the attacks travelling with false passports, craft knives such as those used in the hijackings and hair dye. Nabil Almarabh, a Boston taxi driver alleged to have links to al-Qaeda, is also being held. Some legal experts believe that the US Supreme Court, which has a conservative tilt, might be prepared to support curtailing the civil liberties of prisoners in terrorism cases.
However, a warning that torture should be avoided came from Robert Blitzer, a former head of the FBI’s counter-terrorism section. He said that the practice “goes against every grain in my body. Chances are you are going to get the wrong person and risk damage or killing them.”
In all, about 800 people have been rounded up since the attacks, most of whom are expected to be found to be innocent. Investigators believe there could be hundreds of people linked to al-Qaeda living in the US, and the Bush Administration has issued a warning that more attacks are probably being planned.
Newsweek magazine reports today that Mohammed Atta, the suspected ringleader who died in the first plane to hit the World Trade Centre, had been looking into hitting an aircraft carrier. Investigators retracing his movements found that he visited the huge US Navy base at Norfolk, Virginia, in February and April this year.
We don't complain, we KILL them.
Ever know of any enemy that hasn't? Hey the nazi's used machine guns as well, should we not use those?
Point is they are both common in WAR.
The individuals in the custody of law enforcement right now are criminal suspects, not prisoners of war (especially considering that we are not officially in a state of war, thanks to Congress). As such, they have all the rights afforded under the Constitution, rights that cannot be changed or weakened except by amendment. Like it or not, they can't legally be tortured.
My whole point is, I want whatever works best with each individual. I would love it if a miracle potion could make them tell all. But the last thing on my mind is the welfare of the terrorists. No I don't want to torture them for revenge. No I don't think that they DESERVE torture. I am just concerned with AMERICAN lives here.
I fully expect they'll be doing that anyway.
Well, my hope was that the threat alone would make them spill it...
These amendments are as much a part of the Constitution as the original articles.
As for the preamble, which is nothing more than a statement of principles, notice that it too makes no use of the word "citizens." The word is used, for example when describing the qualifications of office for congressmen and the president, so it can't be assumed that "people" and "citizens" are interchangable terms. If the Founders had wished to extend legal protections only to citizens, they would have done so. If you believe that is what should be done now, advocate a Constitutional amendment.
Frankly, instead of griping about torture, the FBI should be using the means at its disposal (wiretaps, surveillance, etc.) to track down would-be martyrs before they carry out their plans. Then again, if recent history is any guide, that's not something the FBI is particularly good at.
What's your answer to post #262?
Not as a punishment and not in normal circumstances. However, you need to really define torture. The hot lamp in one's face can be conceived as torture. The black eyes that many FBI agents and police officers have handed out in interrogation rooms could be conceived as torture. Where is the line drawn? The BoR only speaks to punishment.
If they were to torture an innocent person, even by mistake, they should be held responsible. I only speak for those proven to have connection to Al Quieda and proven to know information pertinent to American lives. If an agent make the mistake of harming an innocent, they have a jail cell waiting for them.
When did you take over. I must have missed that.
PEOPLE
From the context of the Preamble, one may conclude that the laws of the United States do not apply to People. The People, as ordainers and establishers of the country are sovereigns of the country, may not be involuntarily subjected to the laws of the United States.
Because of Amendment X ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the government has no authority, and cannot assume any authority over the People. Government powers may not reach beyond that which is constitutionally granted. In order for the government to subject People to its law it is necessary for the People to relinquish their sovereignty. Sovereignty is a natural right which cannot lawfully be relinquished involuntarily. Any removal of sovereignty must be accomplished voluntarily by the subject himself.
CITIZEN
The phrase, "citizens of the United States," is defined in the Constitution for the United States of America, Amendment XIV:
AMENDMENT XIV
Section 1. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Section 5. "The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."STRUCTURE OF AMENDMENT XIV
WHO: All persons
QUALIFICATION:
(A) born or naturalized in the United States, and
(B) subject to the jurisdiction thereof
PURPOSE: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
If all else fails use the South Korean method of interrogation. Take 3 of them up in a helicopter. Ask a question. No answer, out the first one goes. Ask a question. Wrong answer. Out the second one goes. The third one should talk. This works well if you can determine the one who wants to die the least (that is your talker).
If all else fails use the South Korean method of interrogation. Take 3 of them up in a helicopter. Ask a question. No answer, out the first one goes. Ask a question. Wrong answer. Out the second one goes. The third one should talk. This works well if you can determine the one who wants to die the least (that is your talker).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.