Even John Yoo agreed waterboarding was torture on his definition -- I recall him saying that at a public debate at Fordham in, maybe early 2005? Akin to any other way of putting someone in fear of imminent death -- don't know if it was he that analogized it to mock execution, but someone there that night did.
 

Do we have any reason to believe that they will stop waterboarding?
 

Do we have any reason to believe that they will stop waterboarding?


Should intelligence agencies abide by executive or legislative orders that clearly restrict their authority to choose the appropriate methods for collecting intelligence?
 

What were those previous reports? Were any of them sourced to CIA officials?
 

I will not rest till every detainee gets a Tempur-Pedic and a full eight hours every night! Join me! 1-2-3-4 Tempur-Pedic or no more!
 

Join me! 1-2-3-4 Tempur-Pedic or no more!

Hm. Lacks a little je ne sais quoi. You right-wingers are going to have to work harder to match classics like "Hey, Hey, LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?" or "And it's 1, 2, 3, what are we fightin for?..."
 

So humblelawstudent thinks ""longtime standing," which includes exhaustion and sleep deprivation with prisoners forced to stand, handcuffed with their feet shackled to the floor." is too wimpy to protect its precious little self. Maybe whatever law school admitted humble should take 24 out of the curriculum.
 

Mark,

Lefties can win this battle. I readily concede.
 

Masaccio,

Are you kidding? At least get your 24 references correct! The techniques you list would take far longer than 24 hours to achieve an effect--they just wouldn't fit properly into a season.
 

I wish all the supporters and proponents of torture, in all its various forms, could personally experience the cruelty themselves firsthand. I am certain it would color their perceptions about the "correctness" of all forms of torture they had hitherto advocated.
 

One thing I'm not clear about: what happens if you don't stand up? The technique is one thing, but what legal things can they do to you if you refuse by simply going limp?
 

maybe they shackle their feet firmly and brace their calves.
 

The truly frightening thing about the supporters of torture is that they see a difference between when WE do it and when THEY do it.

If we purport to be the purveyors of truth, justice and the 'Murrican way, then we have to behave like we have something worth emulating and defending — not like yet another rogue state.
 

"what legal things can they do to you if you refuse by simply going limp?"

Why do you limit your question to "legal" things? They can beat you and torture you and threaten your life until you cooperate.
 

I suspect that in both cases, I should have said "as if' instead of 'like' in my previous post should.

Too few coffee this morning.
 

Is this supposed to be news? The Administration has been telling the press on background that this technique was not being currently used for months now.

Of course, I am unaware of any high value targets with knowledge of al Qaeda operations which are currently being held by the CIA against whom waterboarding would be justified. So, this is not much of a concession.

If we capture Zawahiri and he is not immediately forthcoming, I assure you that any GOP President and perhaps most Dem Presidents will authorize water boarding to get actionable intelligence on ongoing terrorist operations in Pakistan and around the world - just like Bush did with KSM and the handful of others against whom this technique has been used to useful effect.

BTW, some of you will want to see a movie called "Rendition" due to come out this fall, as part of a series of anti war movies Hollywood is spewing during that time period. With the tagline "What if someone you love...just disappeared," the trailer seems indicates that the theme of "Rendition" is that the government disappears a US citizen or resident of Egyptian decent to a Egypt for torture by the "secret police" based on a TSP intercept, while his beautiful and long suffering WASP wife hysterically bangs her head against an unresponsive bureaucracy trying to find her innocent husband. It should appeal to the paranoid.
 

RoadPoet-NY.com said...

The truly frightening thing about the supporters of torture is that they see a difference between when WE do it and when THEY do it.

This riposte might have some merit if CIA interrogation techniques were even in the same universe as the real life torture perpetrated by al Qaeda. However, they are not at all similar. A few months ago, I did a comparison between the al Qaeda torture manual and the CIA interrogation techniques at my blog. Even if you want to play the "see no evil, hear no evil" game and ignore my analysis, go directly to the al Qaeda torture manual and see what real torture is all about.
 

Because the OLC opinions "permitting" waterboarding still stand, and this decision seems to have originated solely within the CIA, can we assume that this means waterboarding is not an effective interrogation technique?

Either it is good for the war on terror or it is not. Given that there is apparently very little in the OLC standing in the way of the Cheney/Addington theory on necessity, I think the conclusion must be that waterboarding does not work. And if this is the case, is this a tacit admission by the CIA more broadly that torture may not work?

Or is the CIA cleaning house before a new DOJ and President (perhaps less enamored of torture) takes the reins in 2009?
 

what happens if you don't stand up?

You're not *supposed* to keep standing up; you're supposed to become so exhausted that you sag, placing painful stress on your arm sockets, etc.

Then the torturer mocks you for "torturing yourself." The KGB and CIA concur that techinques where the victim can be blamed for "self-inflicted" pain are good for attacking morale.
 

"This riposte might have some merit if CIA interrogation techniques were even in the same universe as the real life torture perpetrated by al Qaeda."

We know that the U.S. has tortured many detainees to death (e.g., the one in Afghanistan whose legs were beaten literally to a pulp) and others to insanity (e.g. Padilla). I don't know how much worse you can get than that. But I certainly hope that it is true that al Qaeda's methods of torture are worse, because, if they are, that would make me proud to be an American!
 

Henry said...

BD: "This riposte might have some merit if CIA interrogation techniques were even in the same universe as the real life torture perpetrated by al Qaeda."

We know that the U.S. has tortured many detainees to death (e.g., the one in Afghanistan whose legs were beaten literally to a pulp) and others to insanity (e.g. Padilla).

What is your idea of "many?"

Padilla was not tortured or driven insane. The court rejected the insanity defense concocted by his hired gun psych.

That leaves one unidentified claim.

Care to actually provide a link which shows that any of these alleged cases used the CIA interrogation techniques or were much more likely criminal abuses which were criminally investigated and prosecuted?
 

The prisoners in Guantanamo are in solitary confinement. It is common knowledge that long-term solitary confinement results in insanity. We are torturing these men every moment of every day.
 

Torture? Not according to bart depalma.
 

Bart...

This isn't a contest we win by pointing to them as the nastiest torturer. The problem the Cons ignore is that there's no moral or even actual victory in torturing less.

Torture is the wrong model for a democratic country to use when it is arguing that democracy is the better choice for Iraq or anyone else.

The only position that can justify our actions as a nation is knowing that we ARE right - not slightly better, a little less violent, or somewhat more open as a society.

That's worth striving for. Whereas coming in second in a torturing contest, uh... isn't.
 

"Padilla was not tortured or driven insane. The court rejected the insanity defense concocted by his hired gun psych."

Whew...I'm so relieved. "The court" rejected Padilla's claims; it's settled for sure...the man was never tortured, abused, deprived of his legal or Constitutional rights, never suffered disabling, perhaps permanent, mental duress and disorientation, wrought by years of solitary confinement and sensory deprivation...and, by extension, we can be as certain he was never subjected to more "proactive" interrogation techniques designed to break a subject down. After all, the CIA and this government have gone to great lengths to perfect and justify interrogation techniques that it certainly never employed against their star "terrorist" captive.

I can sleep easy tonight: both Padilla and our republic are right as rain, and the system worked as it should have. The court made its pronouncment and there's simply no more doubt about it.
 

"...the theme of "Rendition" is that the government disappears a US citizen or resident of Egyptian decent to a Egypt for torture by the "secret police" based on a TSP intercept, while his beautiful and long suffering WASP wife hysterically bangs her head against an unresponsive bureaucracy trying to find her innocent husband. It should appeal to the paranoid."

I don't think it counts as "paranoia" when there's plenty of documentation of innocent parties subjected, either due to mistake or carelessness, to the practice of rendition. Khaled El-Masri comes immediately to mind, as well as Bisher al-Rawi and Mohamed Bashmilah. Say whatever else you want about rendition, but it hasn't only happened to the guilty.

BTW, Stephen Grey also explores the practice of rendition in "Ghost Plane". Interesting read.
 

Quick hits...

Henry said...

The prisoners in Guantanamo are in solitary confinement. It is common knowledge that long-term solitary confinement results in insanity. We are torturing these men every moment of every day.

The vast majority of prisoners at Gitmo are not in solitary.

Moreover, solitary confinement is not torture, it is a common element of our civilian prison system. Indeed, solitary confinement is the norm at the Supermax civilian prison where Padilla is almost certainly heading and where most of the Gitmo detainees would end up if they were treated a civilian criminal defendants.

RoadPoet-NY.com said...

Bart... This isn't a contest we win by pointing to them as the nastiest torturer. The problem the Cons ignore is that there's no moral or even actual victory in torturing less.

No, the obvious conclusion one would draw from comparing the al Qaeda torture (which includes beatings, drillings, burnings, electro shock, dismemberment) and the CIA interrogation techniques (which at worst include 2 minutes of simulated drowning, standing for long periods and mixing up meals and temperature) is to show the uninitiated what real "severe pain" and thus torture means.

Robert Cook said...

"Padilla was not tortured or driven insane. The court rejected the insanity defense concocted by his hired gun psych."

Whew...I'm so relieved. "The court" rejected Padilla's claims; it's settled for sure...

I was under the impression that you folks wanted the courts without an ounce of military experience to second guess the military and make these determinations...

Don said...

BD: "...the theme of "Rendition" is that the government disappears a US citizen or resident of Egyptian decent to a Egypt for torture by the "secret police" based on a TSP intercept, while his beautiful and long suffering WASP wife hysterically bangs her head against an unresponsive bureaucracy trying to find her innocent husband. It should appeal to the paranoid."

I don't think it counts as "paranoia" when there's plenty of documentation of innocent parties subjected, either due to mistake or carelessness, to the practice of rendition.

The paranoia comes into play because the movie and many who post here have this fantasy that the government practices rendition on innocent US citizens. Rather, rendition started under the Dem Clinton administration to capture foreign unlawful enemy combatants hiding as "civilians" in other countries and behind their legal systems.

The cases to which you cite are the exception rather than the rule. Of the dozens of terrorists who were captured and returned to their home countries (with the cooperation of the hypocritical EU governments which did not want them in their countries), no one contests that nearly all of them we in fact members of terrorist groups.

For example, the capture which got the Italians all riled up was Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, a long standing leader of the Egyptian terror group, al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya. This al Qaeda allied group launched the 93 WTC attack.

We will have to agree to disagree, but I have absolutely no problem capturing and rendering foreigners who have reason to believe are members of any al Qaeda terror group. We are at war and these are enemy combatants in that war.
 

"Moreover, solitary confinement is not torture, it is a common element of our civilian prison system."

Implicit in that statement is that, if it is a common element of our civilian prison system, then, by definition, it cannot be torture. Not only long-term solitary confinement, therefore, is not torture, but rape is not torture, even though, in some of our prisons, it is so prevalent that it must be considered as part of a prison sentence.