Obama to decide today on torture memos

[Dimmauk]

Bush-era interrogation memo: No torture without 'severe pain' intent - CNN.com

I'm sure you've seen this article by now, but it has links to the memos. I haven't had a chance to read them yet.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Interrogation tactics such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation and slapping did not violate laws against torture when there was no intent to cause severe pain, according to a Bush-era memo on the tactics released Thursday.
Attorney General Eric Holder says government workers who followed protocol won't be prosecuted.

Attorney General Eric Holder says government workers who followed protocol won't be prosecuted.

"To violate the statute, an individual must have the specific intent to inflict severe pain or suffering," said an August 2002 memo from then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee to John Rizzo, who was acting general counsel for the CIA.

"Because specific intent is an element of the offense, the absence of specific intent negates the charge of torture. ... We have further found that if a defendant acts with the good faith belief that his actions will not cause such suffering, he has not acted with specific intent," Bybee wrote.

The Bybee opinion was sought on 10 interrogation tactics in the case of suspected al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah.

The memo authorized keeping Zubaydah in a dark, confined space small enough to restrict the individual's movement for no more than two hours at a time. In addition, putting a harmless insect into the box with Zubaydah, who "appears to have a fear of insects," and telling him it is a stinging insect would be allowed, as long as Zubaydah was informed the insect's sting would not be fatal or cause severe pain.

"If, however, you were to place the insect in the box without informing him that you are doing so ... you should not affirmatively lead him to believe that any insect is present which has a sting that could produce severe pain or suffering or even cause his death," the memo said.

Other memos allowed the use of such tactics as keeping a detainee naked and in some cases in a diaper, and putting detainees on a liquid diet.

On waterboarding, in which a person gets the sensation of drowning, the memo said, "although the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death, prolonged mental harm must nonetheless result" to violate the law.

Authorities also were allowed to slap a detainee's face "to induce shock, surprise or humiliation" and strike his abdomen with the back of the hand in order to disabuse a detainee's notion that he will not be touched, the memos said.

Bybee noted in the memo that the CIA agreed all tactics should be used under expert supervision. Other memos said waterboarding can be used only if the CIA has "credible intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent" and if a detainee is believed to have information that could prevent, disrupt or delay an attack, and other methods fail to elicit the information.

Another memo to Rizzo, from Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury on May 10, 2005, noted that nudity could be used as an interrogation technique.

"Detainees subject to sleep deprivation who are also subject to nudity as a separate interrogation technique will at times be nude and wearing a diaper," it said, noting that the diaper is "for sanitary and health purposes of the detainee; it is not used for the purpose of humiliating the detainee and it is not considered to be an interrogation technique."

"The detainee's skin condition is monitored, and diapers are changed as needed so that the detainee does not remain in a soiled diaper," the memo said.

Another Bradbury memo laid out techniques and when they should be used in a "prototypical interrogation."

"Several of the techniques used by the CIA may involve a degree of physical pain, as we have previously noted, including facial and abdominal slaps, walling, stress positions and water dousing," it said. "Nevertheless, none of these techniques would cause anything approaching severe physical pain."

All of the CIA techniques were adapted from military "survival evasion resistance escape" training, according to a May 30, 2005, memo from Bradbury to Rizzo.

"Although there are obvious differences between training exercises and actual interrogations, the fact that the United States uses similar techniques on its own troops for training purposes strongly suggests that these techniques are not categorically beyond the pale," the memo said.

The memo said waterboarding and other techniques were used on Zubaydah; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, believed to be the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and identified as "KSM" in the memo; and another suspected al Qaeda leader, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

"The CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including KSM and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques," the memo said.

"These legal legal memoranda demonstrate in alarming detail exactly what the Bush administration authorized for 'high value detainees' in U.S. custody," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a statement. "The techniques are chilling. This was not an 'abstract legal theory,' as some former Bush administration officials have characterized it. These were specific techniques authorized to be used on real people."

In releasing the memos in response to a public records request from the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups, the Obama administration informed CIA officials they will not be prosecuted for past waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics.

Attorney General Eric Holder promised in a separate statement that officials who used the controversial interrogation tactics were in the clear if their actions were consistent with the legal advice from the Justice Department under which they were operating at the time.

"My judgment on the content of these memos is a matter of record," President Obama said in a statement released from the White House.

Obama prohibited the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding shortly after taking office in January. Such techniques "undermine our moral authority and do not make us safer," he said Thursday.

The president said that while United States must sometimes "protect information that is classified for purposes of national security," he decided to release the memos because he believes "strongly in transparency and accountability" and "exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release."

Obama argued that "withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time."

"This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States," he said.

He added that the officials involved in the questionable interrogations would not be subject to prosecution because the intelligence community must be provided "with the confidence" it needs to do its job.

The president pledged to work to ensure the actions described in the memos "never take place again."

[Olo401]

Obama's statement:

I think he is deserving of praise in this instance; he did the right thing.

It's really amazing how he thinks though.. and how he explains things in a way people can understand.

I read this and realized that Obama had a tremendously difficult choice here - prosecute and keep these memos secret as part of a criminal investigation until presented in a petit jury trial, or declassify them for the sake of admitting the truth and correcting the problem and know that you won't be able to prosecute anyone with these memos as evidence. Either way there will be people who are going to be pissed off. I know a LOT of people who are flipping out that Yoo and Bybee are getting a walk from this - for me especially Bybee because he's a goddamn Federal Judge now and he deserves to be impeached and thrown in jail.

[thatwasnifty]

Did any of these techniques even work and produce useful, valid information?

[Dimmauk]

Did any of these techniques even work and produce useful, valid information?

They say it did, but how would we know for sure? Its very hard to beleive anything the Bush administration said.

[Mizango]

Did any of these techniques even work and produce useful, valid information?

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y15...ick-cheney.jpg

Of course they did! reh-reh-REH-reh! We did this to protect you and your children. If you doubt this for a second you're a goddamn terrorist or a Democrat. Those guys are one in the same...reh-reh-REH-reh-reh!

[Groovebox]

The right thing would be to pursue prosecution of the "torturers" imo... as usual, nothing happens.

[Dimmauk]

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y15...ick-cheney.jpg

Of course they did! reh-reh-REH-reh! We did this to protect you and your children. If you doubt this for a second you're a goddamn terrorist or a Democrat. Those guys are one in the same...reh-reh-REH-reh-reh!

Did you order the Tortue?

You're God damn right I did!
http://redstick.files.wordpress.com/...njacktruth.jpg

[Kuya]

I remember some professionals saying (i'll have to find links) that torture was rather ineffective and that it tended to lead to wrong information, and that negotiating and convincing the captives that you were on their side was the most effective method of getting them to talk, assuming they were even terrorists at all. As for the Obama administration not pushing for prosecution, it should be noted that it specifically mentions CIA officials (which to some should also come under scrutiny, and i somewhat agree), but it does not exclude the possibility of, as the Spanish judges are doing, prosecuting Bush administration officials.

[Enkidu]

I remember some professionals saying (i'll have to find links) that torture was rather ineffective and that it tended to lead to wrong information, and that negotiating and convincing the captives that you were on their side was the most effective method of getting them to talk, assuming they were even terrorists at all. As for the Obama administration not pushing for prosecution, it should be noted that it specifically mentions CIA officials (which to some should also come under scrutiny, and i somewhat agree), but it does not exclude the possibility of, as the Spanish judges are doing, prosecuting Bush administration officials.

I'd bet Good Cop/Bad Cop is what they're really after, not just torture. I really doubt it's possible to convince a terrorist that you're on their side without some sort of psychological or physical "motivation" clouding their minds.

Of course I'm only talking about the high-profile terrorists that were likely handled only by experts, the other torture that occurred in other areas and to lesser suspects is completely different in my opinion.

[GeneJackit]

Honestly, if this is what you call "torture" then the word really has no meaning.

come back to me when there is some genital electrocution.



That fact that there hasnt been another terrorist attack since 9/11 may be a good indicator that some of these techniques may have worked, or we may have been incredibly lucky

[Plow]

I don't even know what to think about waterboarding really.

Like... I almost want to set it up and try it just to see for myself what it's really like.


It seems like it wouldn't even be like... anything at all, but apparently it's so damn effective the U.S. stopped even bothering to attempt to train people to resist because it was worthless to even try resisting.


edit: ok I got curious as to who came up with it and started doing research on it, and apparently it's often done in a worse way than what I had understood it to be, so, yeah, nevermind lol

[Olo401]

That fact that there hasnt been another terrorist attack since 9/11 may be a good indicator that some of these techniques may have worked, or we may have been incredibly lucky

No it's an indicator that Bush played right into their hands. They didn't need to attack us here in order to kill our people anymore, and they could drain our country's finances the the breaking point, just like they did (with our help) to the Soviets in Afghanistan.

[Kuya]

Honestly, if this is what you call "torture" then the word really has no meaning.

come back to me when there is some genital electrocution.



That fact that there hasnt been another terrorist attack since 9/11 may be a good indicator that some of these techniques may have worked, or we may have been incredibly lucky

Let's sacrifice people to a volcano. When the volcano doesn't explode we'll say that it's because we sacrificed people, and when it does, we'll say it was because we didn't sacrifice enough.

[Olo401]

I don't even know what to think about waterboarding really.

Like... I almost want to set it up and try it just to see for myself what it's really like.

It seems like it wouldn't even be like... anything at all, but apparently it's so damn effective the U.S. stopped even bothering to attempt to train people to resist because it was worthless to even try resisting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=http:...8&feature=fvsr

They didn't even have to dump more than a few splashes of water for him to quit.. that's how fucked up this thing is..

[GeneJackit]

Let's sacrifice people to a volcano. When the volcano doesn't explode we'll say that it's because we sacrificed people, and when it does, we'll say it was because we didn't sacrifice enough.

thats a logical fallacy b/c no volcano has been prevented from erupting due to human sacrifice...on the other hand, interrogation has proven to be an effective means to gather intel on an enemy...im not even talking about the "ticking time bomb" scenario, im talking about general intel gathering, which includes interrogation of prisoners and P.O.Ws

[Dimmauk]

Honestly, if this is what you call "torture" then the word really has no meaning.

come back to me when there is some genital electrocution.



That fact that there hasnt been another terrorist attack since 9/11 may be a good indicator that some of these techniques may have worked, or we may have been incredibly lucky

Yeah we were probably just lucky Pre 9/11 too. Or maybe we were just Unlucky 9/11 happend.

We should use the Tango and Cash F.U.B.A.R technique

http://jacobdestree.files.wordpress....ngocash460.jpg

Gabriel Cash: Don't you think you're getting a little radical here?
Ray Tango: What's radical?
Gabriel Cash: Blowing a man's head off with a fucking hand grenade is a touch much, don't you think?
Ray Tango: You got your way - I got mine.
Gabriel Cash: Come on, maybe he doesn't know anything.
Ray Tango: I don't really care.

[Tango has just stuck a grenade down a bad guy's pants]
Ray Tango: My contribution to birth control.

Ray Tango: Do you think he's telling the truth?
Gabriel Cash: I don't know. But it's not raining and he's standing in a puddle.
Ray Tango: Disgusting.

[Kuya]

thats a logical fallacy b/c no volcano has been prevented from erupting due to human sacrifice...on the other hand, interrogation has proven to be an effective means to gather intel on an enemy...im not even talking about the "ticking time bomb" scenario, im talking about general intel gathering, which includes interrogation of prisoners and P.O.Ws

Prove it. Also, prove that torture is only used on those guilty of crimes.

Good luck with that.

edit: you don't know what logical fallacy means

[GeneJackit]

Prove it. Also, prove that torture is only used on those guilty of crimes.

Good luck with that.

edit: you don't know what logical fallacy means

Never said toture has only been used on those guilty of a crime...i think a shining (more recent) example of this is the Argentinian dictatorship in the late 70s early 80s.

Interrogtaion =/= torture.

All Im saying is that some slapping, sleep deprivation, confinement in a small space is not torture...


EDIT: I should've said: "Your reasoning makes no sense whatsoever." I apologize for using "logical fallacy" incorrectly.

[Kuya]

Never said toture has only been used on those guilty of a crime...i think a shining (more recent) example of this is the Argentinian dictatorship in the late 70s early 80s.

Interrogtaion =/= torture.

All Im saying is that some slapping, sleep deprivation, confinement in a small space is not torture...


EDIT: I should've said: "Your reasoning makes no sense whatsoever." I apologize for using "logical fallacy" incorrectly.

Water boarding, which they used, is torture, slamming people against walls, which they used is torture, and as for sleep deprivation, why, if it's not torture, is it talked about under a context of torture?

Professional torturers in some countries have used techniques such as electrical shock, asphyxiation, heat, cold, noise, and sleep deprivation which leave little evidence, although in other contexts torture frequently results in horrific mutilation or death.

Sleep deprivation can be used as a means of torture. Under one interrogation technique, a subject might be kept awake for several days and when finally allowed to fall asleep, suddenly awakened and questioned. Menachem Begin, the Prime Minister of Israel from 1977-83, described his experience of sleep deprivation when a prisoner of the KGB in Russia as follows:

In the head of the interrogated prisoner, a haze begins to form. His spirit is wearied to death, his legs are unsteady, and he has one sole desire: to sleep...Anyone who has experienced this desire knows that not even hunger and thirst are comparable with it.[citation needed]

In 2006, Australian Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock argued that sleep deprivation does not constitute torture. [28] In rats, prolonged, complete sleep deprivation increases both food intake and energy expenditure, leading to weight loss and, ultimately, death.[29] Nicole Bieske, a spokeswoman for Amnesty International Australia, has stated, "At the very least, sleep deprivation is cruel, inhumane and degrading. If used for prolonged periods of time it is torture."[30]

BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | The real victims of sleep deprivation

Going without sleep is intensely stressful, with unpredictable short and long-term effects. People lose the ability to act and think coherently. And as it leaves no physical mark on the victim, the interrogator can claim that they never laid a finger on those in their charge.


Former KGB prison in Vilnius, Lithuania
John Schlapobersky, consultant psychotherapist to the Medical Foundation for Victims of Torture, was himself tortured through sleep deprivation, in his case in apartheid South Africa in the 1960s.

"Making a programme in which people are deprived of sleep is like treating them with medication that will make them psychotic. It also demeans the experiences of those who have involuntarily gone through this form of torture. It is the equivalent of bear-baiting, and we banned that centuries ago.

"I was kept without sleep for a week in all. I can remember the details of the experience, although it took place 35 years ago. After two nights without sleep, the hallucinations start, and after three nights, people are having dreams while fairly awake, which is a form of psychosis.

"By the week's end, people lose their orientation in place and time - the people you're speaking to become people from your past; a window might become a view of the sea seen in your younger days. To deprive someone of sleep is to tamper with their equilibrium and their sanity."

Menachem Begin, the Israeli prime minister from 1977-83, was tortured by the KGB as a young man. In his book, White Nights: The Story of a Prisoner in Russia, he wrote of losing the will to resist when deprived of sleep.

"In the head of the interrogated prisoner, a haze begins to form. His spirit is wearied to death, his legs are unsteady, and he has one sole desire: to sleep... Anyone who has experienced this desire knows that not even hunger and thirst are comparable with it.

"I came across prisoners who signed what they were ordered to sign, only to get what the interrogator promised them.

"He did not promise them their liberty; he did not promise them food to sate themselves. He promised them - if they signed - uninterrupted sleep! And, having signed, there was nothing in the world that could move them to risk again such nights and such days."

Furthermore, how is it possible to be a libertarian, and support torture? Not just because it is torture, but because torture goes hand in hand with denying habeas corpus rights. You can't have both. If you allow people the right to challenge their detention, then you first have to prove that they're terrorist in order to torture them, which makes the whole thing redundant. It is necessary for a government that wants to pursue torture to deny habeas corpus, because if they torture innocent people, then these people will then be able to prove their innocence, bringing what was done to them to the public, AND be able to file charges against the government for torturing them when they did nothing. But how is one to know who is innocent and who isn't when they are denied the right to challenge their accusations? You can't, and they won't, because if you want to torture people, then you can't give them their rights.

But you're afraid of terrorist attacks, is that why you want people to be tortured? Don't worry, i know how you can stop terrorist attacks, that's even more effective than torture! We can start by not doing this:

Air strikes and artillery barrages have taken a heavy toll among the most vulnerable of the Iraqi people, with children and women forming a disproportionate number of the dead.

Analysis carried out for the research group Iraq Body Count (IBC) found that 39 per cent of those killed in air raids by the US-led coalition were children and 46 per cent were women. Fatalities caused by mortars, used by American and Iraqi government forces as well as insurgents, were 42 per cent children and 44 per cent women.

Twelve per cent of those killed by suicide bombings, mainly the tool of militant Sunni groups, were children and 16 per cent were females. One in five (21 per cent) of those killed by car bombs, used by both Shia and Sunni fighters, was a child; one in four (28 per cent) was a woman.

The figures, compiled by academics at King’s College and Royal Holloway, University of London, show that hi-tech weaponry has caused lethal damage to those in the population who would be furthest away from the conflict.

Or this:

LAHORE: Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides perishing 687 innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.

Figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities show that a total of 701 people, including 14 al-Qaeda leaders, have been killed since January 2006 in 60 American predator attacks targeting the tribal areas of Pakistan. Two strikes carried out in 2006 had killed 98 civilians while three attacks conducted in 2007 had slain 66 Pakistanis, yet none of the wanted al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders could be hit by the Americans right on target. However, of the 50 drone attacks carried out between January 29, 2008 and April 8, 2009, 10 hit their targets and killed 14 wanted al-Qaeda operatives. Most of these attacks were carried out on the basis of intelligence believed to have been provided by the Pakistani and Afghan tribesmen who had been spying for the US-led allied forces stationed in Afghanistan.

The remaining 50 drone attacks went wrong due to faulty intelligence information, killing hundreds of innocent civilians, including women and children. The number of the Pakistani civilians killed in those 50 attacks stood at 537, in which 385 people lost their lives in 2008 and 152 people were slain in the first 99 days of 2009 (between January 1 and April 8).

That causes terrorism. That causes people to hate the US. You want to stop terrorist attacks. Get out of the Middle East, get all your bases and soldiers out of the Middle East, stop supporting tyrannical governments in Saudi Arabia and in Afghanistan, and stop supporting racist states like Israel. This is what causes terrorism towards the US, not because they hate your freedom, not because they hate your way of life, but because you kill thousands of women and children in your country's pursuit for someone new to fight.

[0ni0n]

That fact that there hasnt been another terrorist attack since 9/11 may be a good indicator that some of these techniques may have worked, or we may have been incredibly lucky.

I have never been attacked by bears since I start breathing, I guess me breathing oxygen is quite effective in deterring bear attacks.