Done in our name
They said yes, and yes again.
That was the point. That was the whole idea.
The interrogators from the CIA would describe what they wanted to do, or had already done, to certain prisoners in their control, and at the “Justice” Department, a handful of lawyers would find a way to declare that whatever the interrogators had done, or were about to do, to those prisoners was just fine.
No problem. Even when it was torture.
Especially when it was torture. That was the whole idea.
The memoranda are public now, with only a few words missing, and the calculation perfectly—chillingly—intact. Here are the interrogation “techniques”—sleep deprivation and dietary manipulation, the facial hold and the abdominal slap, stress positions and cramped confinement and “walling” and water dousing and waterboarding.
Waterboarding.
“This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of ‘suffocation and incipient panic,’ i.e., the perception of drowning. The individual does not breathe any water into his lungs. During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of 12 to 24 inches—The sensation of drowning is immediately relieved by the removal of the cloth. The procedure may then be repeated.”
Note the wonderful precision—the water falling no farther than 24 inches to the victim’s nose and mouth, the “perception of drowning” lasting no longer than 40 seconds each time. There were similar touches decorating—masking—other techniques. The interrogator administering the abdominal slap “must have no rings or other jewelry on his hand.” The cold water poured on the detainee in the water dousing “must be potable, and the interrogators must ensure that water does not enter the detainee’s nose, mouth, or eyes.”
Considerate to a fault, don’t you think? Call it pseudo-science. The artifice of concern.
“Although the subject may experience the fear or panic associated with the feeling of drowning, the waterboard does not inflict physical pain. … Although the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death, prolonged mental harm must nonetheless result to violate the statutory prohibition [on] infliction of severe mental pain or suffering. … Indeed, you have advised us that the relief is almost immediate when the cloth is removed from the nose and mouth. In the absence of prolonged mental harm, no severe mental pain or suffering would have been inflicted, and the use of these procedures would not constitute torture within the meaning of the statute.”
Were they prepared to call it torture if that “threat of imminent death” had lasted 50 seconds? A full minute? Would it have been torture if the abdominal slap had left a jewelry scratch? If the water for the water dousing had been less than drinkable? If the walls the prisoners were slammed into over and over again had been more solidly constructed?
Not a chance.
Nothing was ever going to be over the line—because there was no line. Or rather, because whatever line there was could be easily moved to a point just beyond whatever it was the interrogators wanted to do.
Chalk it up to investigative zeal, to understandable fear of further attacks, to lawyers—and their bosses—run amok. Blame it on arrogance, or frustration, or rage, or vengeance plain and simple. How else to explain waterboarding Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times in August of 2002 alone? Or waterboarding Khalid Shaikh Mohammed 183 times just in March of 2003? If this isn’t behavior that “shocks the conscience,” it’s only because the people who consistently approved it and excused it and applied it had put their consciences in a lockbox.
And the rest of us?
If the rest of us are to live with ourselves, if we’re to regain our own consciences, our own souls, first we have to see it for what it was, and call it by its rightful name, this terrible thing that was done in our name.
It was torture.
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. You can write to him at rickhoro@execpc.com.
Apr 23, 2009 at 9:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
I'm with toasty2k and seabea: I have no sympathy and when they broadcast numerous beheadings, I say smoke em!! They deserve it! What about the 2,000 to 3,000 people who were killed on 9/11?? That makes me want to go waterboard them myself. Wake up people they want to kill us and our namby-pamby commander in sheif should get it through his head and fight like a real man!!!!!
Apr 23, 2009 at 8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
BostonBill: So much for people accusing me of being "perfect" - ha! Under the cape, I'm just an ordinary man. Kind of like Obama. I do think he made a huge blunder in releasing this info. Time will tell.
Apr 23, 2009 at 5:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Straight from the horse's mouth:
"Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned [Abu Zubaydah] from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.
"We discovered, for example, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks..."
[...]
"One of the worst consequences of the use of these harsh techniques was that it reintroduced the so-called Chinese wall between the C.I.A. and F.B.I., similar to the communications obstacles that prevented us from working together to stop the 9/11 attacks. Because the bureau would not employ these problematic techniques, our agents who knew the most about the terrorists could have no part in the investigation. An F.B.I. colleague of mine who knew more about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed than anyone in the government was not allowed to speak to him."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opinio...
Apr 23, 2009 at 1:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
SuperDave: I agree with some of your feelings/beliefs/opinions, but when you write about the President of the United States of America and use the word, “incompetance.” (your spelling), I disagree.
Apr 22, 2009 at 6:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Many Muslims have done that already. They have assailed terrorism because the Koran teaches the innocent are not to be harmed. Still not an excuse for us to torture.
Apr 22, 2009 at 5:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
When the muslim world stands up and decries the things done in their name, I will take notice.
Apr 22, 2009 at 5:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
No one is asking for your sympathy, so that's fine. Refusing to look at both sides of the debate, which I know you frequently do, is not.
Apr 22, 2009 at 5 p.m.
Suggest removal
I have no sympathy for people that will video tape their beheading with a knife of their helpless victims or those that associate with them (the beheaders) Waterboarding isn't torture enough.
Apr 22, 2009 at 4:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
I'll bet there was a lot of torture going on before the previous administration that none of us know about, nor will we. I will also bet that Obama isn't all that innocent either as we have already seen him change his mind, quite conveniently I might add on many subjects since he won the White House. I believe that if someone were to attack my children, my family, I would suddenly believe in torture. Pain, to be sure. Which is a form of torture. It's hard to know when and where to draw the line. Do we know how much credible information has been collected because of these methods? How many lives have been saved? I am not advocating torture. I would like more facts. And frankly, I don't think we will ever know. I find in ironic though that middle easterners would complain about our form of torture when it pales in comparison (hardly worthy to be called torture) to theirs.
Apr 22, 2009 at 4 p.m.
Suggest removal
We are left with the same techniques the FBI and CIA used before they were allowed to torture by the previous administration. In those released memos is one from 2005 that states they can`t say whether the torture worked to uncover new terrorist plots or not. Obviously if you have to do something 183 times in a month it`s not very effective. And the other guy, 83 times, after his interrogators told the CIA brass he had given them everything he knew, and were ordered to "torture" him anyway. What about the dead prisoners? Now they can`t even take the ones they know are guilty to court because they were tortured, they will have to be freed.
Apr 22, 2009 at 3:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
I repeat, "other than waterboarding, which you can debate is torture". I base my previous comments on the recently released (last Thursday I think) list of procedures. Obviously, if things are being done beyond that list, then all bets are off. From the article: "Here are the interrogation “techniques”—sleep deprivation and dietary manipulation, the facial hold and the abdominal slap, stress positions and cramped confinement and “walling” and water dousing and waterboarding". And exactly what techniques are we left with now, under Obama? Good cop / bad cop? Asking nicely? Phone a friend?
Apr 22, 2009 at 3:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
There is nothing more idiotic than speaking on behalf of dead people. You know NOTHING about them, so don't talk for them or justify torture in their names. If you really want to discuss a ticking bomb scenario that is fine, but waterboarding the same guy 185 times in a month is TORTURE and is WRONG!!! An eye for an eye only leaves the world blind.
Apr 22, 2009 at 3:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Nick Berg...Eugene Armstrong...Paul Johnson...Jack Kensley and the many more who died from slow beheadings. 2974 innocent Americans died on September 11. And some of us our concerned that we torture people who do most likey assist in those crimes. Ask yourself this, if waterboarding someone saves one American life, is it worth it? Or does that American deserve to die because torturing to save lives is wrong? Or how about this. Would you be ok with torturing an extremist if it saves your life? Your kids life? Or would you be happy knowing that your child died because we were correct in not torturing radicals to get information that would have saved that life or lives? I for one and millions like me rather protect ourselves from these nut jobs at all cost. I know for a fact that there are atleast 2974 people who would have had no problem having someone waterboarded if it meant that they lived to see September 12.
Apr 22, 2009 at 2:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
This is directly from Gen Petreus's COIN manual. So, everyone thinks torture is ok except for the military commander in charge. So, by supporting torture you are undermining our military efforts.
1-132. Illegitimate actions are those involving the use of power without authority—whether committed
by government officials, security forces, or counterinsurgents. Such actions include unjustified or excessive
use of force, unlawful detention, torture, and punishment without trial. Efforts to build a legitimate
government though illegitimate actions are self-defeating, even against insurgents who conceal themselves
amid noncombatants and flout the law. Moreover, participation in COIN operations by U.S. forces
must follow United States law, including domestic laws, treaties to which the United States is party, and
certain HN laws. (See appendix D.) Any human rights abuses or legal violations committed by U.S. forces
quickly become known throughout the local populace and eventually around the world. Illegitimate actions
undermine both long- and short-term COIN efforts.
Apr 22, 2009 at 2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Pretty sure the extent to which "detainees" were subjected to CIA methods of interrogation were well below that which normal service men and women go through on a regular basis.
When the ends justifies the means, we've already lost.
Apr 22, 2009 at 2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
SuperDave, they waterboarded the same guy 185 times in the same month. The problem with your rediculous comparison with the military is that in the military you are a volunteer in a training exercise. Imagine, if you can, a scenario where these things are done to you but since they have been done to you for so long you have no idea when they will end. That is torture. I would only need 8 hours and I could get anyone of you to tell me your mother is blue. Watch the Guantanamo Diaries from the BBC and you will understand.
Apr 22, 2009 at 1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Over 40 detainees dead, government autopsies list over 20 as homicides. Dozens of known prisoners missing and the CIA won`t or can`t say where they are. The enemy knows what lengths we will go to, they have buried some of them. Deaths by beating and strangulation are torture, no question about it. Go to aclu.org to see GOVERNMENT autopsy reports released under the Freedom of Information act(after lawsuits!).
Apr 21, 2009 at 11:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
I read the full descriptions of the procedures, and first let me emphasize - I DO NOT CONDONE TORTURE BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. My reaction to the list of procedures, was, that's it? That's all we do to these "detainees"? Most of the things on the list are almost everyday occurences in, oh let's take the military for example. Sleep deprivation - check. Forced to assume uncomfortable positions for long periods of time - check. Too hot / too cold - check. Getting yelled at (oh, my!) - CHECK. So, other than waterboarding, which you can debate is torture, these don't sound so bad to me, when you consider the situation. Now let's contrast that with the way the other side treats Americans. Flying planes into buildings, killing thousands. Beheading. Dragging a corpse through the streets (oh wait, that doesn't count). As John Stossel says, Give Me A Break! Oh, and a big shout out to the Obama administration for releasing these so that the terrorists now know 1) what to expect, and 2) what not to expect, i.e. the limits of our so-called "torture". I am sure all of our operatives out there in the field are just delighted by your incompetance.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.