Posted on 10/01/2006 7:58:27 AM PDT by dennisw
As Congress has debated legislation that would set up military tribunals and govern the questioning of suspected terrorists (whom the Bush administration would like to be able to detain indefinitely), at issue has been what interrogation techniques can be employed and whether information obtained during torture can be used against those deemed unlawful enemy combatants. One interrogation practice central to this debate is waterboarding. It's usually described in the media in a matter-of-fact manner. The Washington Post simply referred to waterboarding a few days ago as an interrogation measure that "simulates drowning." But what does waterboarding look like?
Below are photographs taken by Jonah Blank last month at Tuol Sleng Prison in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The prison is now a museum that documents Khymer Rouge atrocities. Blank, an anthropologist and former Senior Editor of US News & World Report, is author of the books Arrow of the Blue-Skinned God and Mullahs on the Mainframe. He is a professorial lecturer at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and has taught at Harvard and Georgetown. He currently is a foreign policy adviser to the Democratic staff in the Senate, but the views expressed here are his own observations.
His photos show one of the actual waterboards used by the Khymer Rouge. Here's the first:
Here's another view:
How were they used? Here's a painting by a former prisoner that shows the waterboard in action:
In an email to me, Blank explained the significance of the photos. He wrote:
The crux of the issue before Congress can be boiled down to a simple question: Is waterboarding torture? Anybody who considers this practice to be "torture lite" or merely a "tough technique" might want to take a trip to Phnom Penh. The Khymer Rouge were adept at torture, and there was nothing "lite" about their methods. Incidentally, the waterboard in these photo wasn't merely one among many torture devices highlighted at the prison museum. It was one of only two devices singled out for highlighting (the other was another form of water-torture--a tank that could be filled with water or other liquids; I have photos of that too.) There was an outdoor device as well, one the Khymer Rouge didn't have to construct: chin-up bars. (The prison where the museum is located had been a school before the Khymer Rouge took over). These bars were used for "stress positions"-- another practice employed under current US guidelines. At the Khymer Rouge prison, there is a tank of water next to the bars. It was used to revive prisoners for more torture when they passed out after being placed in stress positions.
The similarity between practices used by the Khymer Rouge and those currently being debated by Congress isn't a coincidence. As has been amply documented ("The New Yorker" had an excellent piece, and there have been others), many of the "enhanced techniques" came to the CIA and military interrogators via the SERE [Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape] schools, where US military personnel are trained to resist torture if they are captured by the enemy. The specific types of abuse they're taught to withstand are those that were used by our Cold War adversaries. Why is this relevant to the current debate? Because the torture techniques of North Korea, North Vietnam, the Soviet Union and its proxies--the states where US military personnel might have faced torture--were NOT designed to elicit truthful information. These techniques were designed to elicit CONFESSIONS. That's what the Khymer Rouge et al were after with their waterboarding, not truthful information.
Bottom line: Not only do waterboarding and the other types of torture currently being debated put us in company with the most vile regimes of the past half-century; they're also designed specifically to generate a (usually false) confession, not to obtain genuinely actionable intel. This isn't a matter of sacrificing moral values to keep us safe; it's sacrificing moral values for no purpose whatsoever.
These photos are important because most of us have never seen an actual, real-life waterboard. The press typically describes it in the most anodyne ways: a device meant to "simulate drowning" or to "make the prisoner believe he might drown." But the Khymer Rouge were no jokesters, and they didn't tailor their abuse to the dictates of the Geneva Convention. They-- like so many brutal regimes--made waterboarding one of their primary tools for a simple reason: it is one of the most viciously effective forms of torture ever devised.
The legislation backed by Bush and congressional Republicans would explicitly permit the use of evidence obtained through waterboarding and other forms of torture. Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and other top al Qaeda leaders have reportedly been subjected to this technique. They would certainly note--or try to note--that at any trial. But with this legislation, the White House is seeking to declare the use of waterboarding (at least in the past) as a legitimate practice of the US government.
The House of Representatives voted for Bush's bill on Thursday, 253 to 168 (with 34 Democrats siding with the president and only seven Republicans breaking with their party's leader). The Senate is expected to vote on the bill today. Its members should consider Blank's photos and arguments before they, too, go off the deep end.
******
To comment on this item--or read comments about this item--click on the time stamp at the end of the posting...Scratch that. I'm told that someone is actively trying to shut down this site by bombarding it with comments. "I think this is not coincidental with the release of your book," my web wizard says. Nearly 300,000 came in last night from the perp--in a massive attempt to crash the site. Consequently, comments are off, and we're figuring out what to do next.
"IF" does not cut it... not even close!
I have met President Bush. I have looked eye to eye into the man. I have faith in GOD, and I have faith in our President. I do not have faith in the media, except for Rush and Brit Hume. It was Hume that stated the facts that I gave you, and it came from CIA reports, interviews with agents in the field, and President Bush himself.
LLS
I suspect David is "belly up to the bar" in that place ~ all too often.
Assuming you are taking a shower in the bidet.
The fact that you're mentioning the two in the same sentence and according them the same credibility tells me all I need to know.
I am dumbstruck with what the dems are doing to themselves. i work with a lot of apolitical people but lately those whom i work with cannot understand why the dems oppose wiretaps and interegation. They are risking putting themselves into the electoral abyss. It doesnt seem the average joe doesnt get to upset that alquida might get a little wet in order to get vital info
How can these idiots be so disconnected - and right. . . the more 'false' info they get. . .the better!
The rationale here is no different than their twisted logic that has them concluding that America on the 'offense' of WOT has created more terrorists. . .
(Imagine. . .If only we would make it easier; so they would have to use less manpower. . - and of course, we have a Dimwit Party that is willing to do just that). . ).
Nacny Pelosi denying the insult of their Party being 'soft' on terrorism; when just prior; she offered her spiritual resolve re WOT. . .'we should treat our enemies. . .as we would have then treat us'. . .
ANY Dems that should read ANY of the above. . . PLEASE take note. . .re your VOTE
How can these idiots be so disconnected - and right. . . the more 'false' info they get. . .the better!
The rationale here is no different than their twisted logic that has them concluding that America on the 'offense' of WOT has created more terrorists. . .
(Imagine. . .If only we would make it easier; so they would have to use less manpower. . - and of course, we have a Dimwit Party that is willing to do just that). . ).
Nacny Pelosi denying the insult of their Party being 'soft' on terrorism; when just prior; she offered her spiritual resolve re WOT. . .'we should treat our enemies. . .as we would have then treat us'. . .
ANY Dems that should read ANY of the above. . . PLEASE take note. . .re your VOTE
No prisoner of American forces ever has to undergo waterboarding, or any other interrogation technique. All they have to do is give us the information we request. If they do this, no discomfort will come to them.
It was in your first post where I learned all that I needed to know about you. It's your right to believe how you wish and to expound on it here, but the First Amendment works both ways... and it works much better if civilty is used in its practice.
LLS
If the intel being gathered by these techniques is of dubious value, then we certainly should reconsider our methods. But I have no moral misgivings whatsoever about extracting information from the vermin we capture. These are the same creatures that plant roadside bombs, behead people, drag burnt corpses through the streets, and fly airplanes into office buildings. It's hard to find much sympathy for their feigned umbrage at our moral "lapses."
There was something "uncivil" about that?
They waterboarded at least some of their intelligence radion ops before sending us to VN in their survival training simulated POW camp.
Having experienced this as a pilot during Survival, Escape, Resistance, and Evasion (SERE) training, I agree that this is NOT torture.
That is torture to the islamists.
My remark was a premise of a syllogism: IF we can believe that intel gathered by use of this technique has prevented 8 al-Qaida attacks in this country, then the intel is not dubious. One thing arguing against blind acceptance of that premise is that George Bush is capable of falsifying data that will aid his case. While that was not the central point of my premise, intellectual rigor demands that it be recognized.
Argue on the merits of your beliefs, not upon my proclamation of faith.
First, your faith inspires no such obligation in me. Secondly, I am not "arguing" anything. I am merely presenting my personal observations, consistent with logical thought. And thirdly, I suspect that this disagreement arose from a misperception. When I suggested that George Bush was capable of misrepresentation, I did not intend to insult your god. In my religion, George Bush is simply a human being, as fallible as the rest of us mere mortals.
The fact that he has achieved a credibility on par with the Almighty in your opinion says more about you than it does about him. And it certainly doesn't lend any logical weight to your case.
liberals will always consider it torture when it is done to one of their own; communist revolutionaries, jihadists, non-uniformed combatants fighting americans, insurgents, AND dirty, un-washed, home-grown socialists...(their bodies may be clean but their minds are nothing but active petri dishes)
I would rather be waterboarded than face a west coast libs idea of a good time: a high colonic. (Just don't ask me weight or age questions.)
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.