I DON'T EVER WANT TO HEAR ABOUT INHUMANE!!!
Posted on 12/25/2002 10:39:28 PM PST by Cinnamon Girl
WASHINGTON - CIA interrogators have been using "stress and duress" techniques on captured enemies in Afghanistan that blur the line between legal and inhumane, the Washington Post reported on Thursday.
The Post described a cluster of metal shipping containers it said constituted a secret CIA interrogation center at Bagram Air Base, headquarters of U.S. forces hunting al Qaeda operatives and commanders of the ousted Taliban militia.
Captives who refused to cooperate were sometimes kept standing or kneeling for hours, in black hoods or spray-painted goggles, the Post said, citing intelligence specialists said to be familiar with CIA interrogation methods.
At times they were held in awkward, painful positions and deprived of sleep with a 24-hour bombardment of lights - subject to what are known as "stress and duress" techniques, the report said.
Those who cooperated were rewarded with "creature comforts" as well as feigned friendship, respect, cultural sensitivity and, in some cases, money, from their interrogators, it said.
On the other hand, some who did not cooperate were turned over - "rendered," in official parlance - to foreign intelligence services whose practice of torture has been documented by the U.S. government and human rights organizations, the Post said.
"In the multifaceted global war on terrorism waged by the Bush administration, one of the most opaque - yet vital - fronts is the detention and interrogation of terrorism suspects," the paper said.
U.S. officials have said little publicly about the captives' names, numbers or whereabouts, and virtually nothing about interrogation methods.
But the Post said it had gained insights thanks to interviews with several former intelligence officials and 10 current U.S. national security officials - including several people who said they had witnessed the handling of prisoners.
"The picture that emerges is of a brass-knuckled quest for information, often in concert with allies of dubious human rights reputation, in which the traditional lines between right and wrong, legal and inhumane, are evolving and blurred," the Post reported.
The U.S. government publicly denounces the use of torture. But each of the current national security officials interviewed for the article defended the use of violence against captives as just and necessary, the Post said.
"They expressed confidence that the American public would back their view," it added. The CIA had no comment on the article, Mark Mansfield, a spokesman, said late on Wednesday night.
The off-limits patch of ground at Bagram was described by the Post as one of a number of secret detention centers overseas where U.S. due process does not apply, where the CIA undertakes or manages the interrogation of suspected terrorists. Another was reported to be Diego Garcia, a British-owned island in the Indian Ocean.
According to U.S. officials, nearly 3,000 suspected al Qaeda members and their supporters have been detained worldwide since Sept. 11, 2001. About 625 are at the U.S. military's confinement facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Some officials estimated that fewer than 100 captives had been rendered to third countries. Thousands had been arrested and held with U.S. assistance in countries known for brutal treatment of prisoners, the officials were quoted as saying.
It is nice to watch .. LOL
It is nice to watch .. LOL
The elitism of these reporters knows no bounds. They pretend to know so much about the world but they are often such a pampered lot that the only world they know well is one which revolves around themselves and their own aspirations to greatness.
This article has a pompous self-righteous ring to it that make it very easy to act flippant about torture. I believe, however, that most Americans would not enjoy actually witnessing people being made to suffer...we have had the luxury of being taught by our parents and our culture that cruelty is sinful...too bad that the Taliban and the Wahabbists worldwide find cruelty so sexually and morally enjoyable...they must have had lousy parents...freedom and Judeo Christian values make all the difference IMHO.
Sounds like they've been talking to MISS CLEO!
...listening to people who write for, or read The Washington Post borders on the cruel and inhumane too.
(And I used to deliver the Post around 1970. $3.25/month IIRC.)
So nice to see the cavalier approval of torture by so many "good" Americans - makes me feel real patriotic.
Nostalgic for the Sixties, eh?
I DON'T EVER WANT TO HEAR ABOUT INHUMANE!!!
If such is taking place it is not for the reason you state (confessions). We already know what they believe, we need to know what they know. Coercive action might be justified to gain crucial information concerning current and future operations and the identity of terrorist operators.
"Well I'm all broke up about terrorists' rights. What about the victims on 9/11? Who speaks for them?"
Rather than expanding an already bloated federal government with potentially intrusive features (like the Patriot Act & Homeland Security Dept.), or resorting to barbarism, we could start by enforcing laws we already have on the books - immigration laws.
We have the people who know what's going to happen in our hands.
That's wishful thinking. How do we know what they know? Is every foot soldier privy to the plans of Bin Laden? Probably no more than a reservist is privy to Bush's daily briefings.
What do you suggest we do to them in order to extract information on future plans from them? If we pull out some fingernails and get info that prevents another 9/11 (or worse), do you consider that to be immoral?
Whatever information extraction techniques we're using at present are a poor joke - at best. Every weekend since 9/11 we've been on a Heightened Security Alert, no doubt based on the testimony of some prisoner. If we start pulling fingernails (the FR torture of choice, it seems), we'd be on a Double-Secret Triple-Red Heightened Security Alert six days a week and twice on Sundays.
Where would you draw a line: the Soviets discovered that some people just wouldn't crack - until their children were tortured in front of them. Should we go there, war is hell ya know?
Read the above quote from the Post story carefully. The interviewee was probably trying to defend us against what the reporter was insinuating, and the meaning was turned by characterizing the interviewee's tone of voice.
Advice to any government worker, soldier, or employee of a large corporation: Never think you are smart enough to outsmart a reporter.
Bottom line is, the Post tried to get proof that we engage in torture, and failed to get that proof. But they went with the story anyway. Sad to say, this disgraceful story will likely be used by the Iraqis to justify mistreatment of any caputured Americans.
Post #114: you are delusional... go back to DU
Just curious: which is the respectful part of your "truth spreading" and which is the discussion part?
Maybe, but even real torture, even the old rack, even killing their family members one by one in front of them, wouldn't work with this martyrdom crowd. And moderate physical force certainly will not work. So why debase ourselves by playing a dirty game we're no good at?
The best we can do is to play good guy-bad guy games to get them to start bragging about their exploits. Once in a while they'll say a bit more than they should, not that it can be easy for us to know this. That's about all I think we are doing, comPost story notwithstanding.
....and setting up concentration camps where they will quarnetine us away from our familes, women and children seperated from the men...right?
FR has heard all of the sky is falling and tin foil stories to last a lifetime.
Hey, you'll get no argument from me on that. Unfortunately, that will only help several years in the future. The sleepers that are already here and their accomplices from Canada/Mexico won't be seriously affected.
Where would you draw a line: the Soviets discovered that some people just wouldn't crack - until their children were tortured in front of them. Should we go there, war is hell ya know?
I don't think we should do that. Have I obtained a higher "moral altitude", in your opinion? In the Real World(TM), boyscout and high school Civics class talk about "moral altitude" falls on its face. We need information from these people and we need it now.
I know, but the larger issue has arisen lately (on the Today Show of all places, with Alan Dershowitz defending the pro-torture side. He, like some of the brave posters here, favors fingernail-related interrogations in exceptional instances.) To those whose moral compass "tilts" in such a way I was hoping to argue that torture is wrong on procedural grounds: it doesn't work! To think that there exists some infallible truth-gathering technique, one that "forces" people to tell exactly what they know, is breathtakingly naive.
BTW I doubt even Dershowitz really believes what he says (I sometimes think he would smear himself with feces just to get on TV). Hopefully you're right that the sentiment expressed on this thread is simply one of revenge.
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.