Thursday, March 18, 2010.

Answering the Lie that the CIA's Interrogation Methods Were "Torture"

May 22, 2009 by John Allen · 11 Comments 

By Mike Griffith, Staff Writer

Recently we’ve seen articles on Veterans Today that have dishonestly juxtaposed disturbing pictures of apparent prisoner mistreatment with sensational headlines and claims about the CIA’s interrogation methods in the war on terror, especially in relation to the CIA’s waterboarding of three high-value Al Qaeda terrorists (Nashiri, KSM, and Zubaydah), even though the pictures do not depict the CIA’s interrogations of terrorists.  One recent article even argued that such methods as sleep deprivation and forced stress positions are also "torture."  So now, according to these folks, it’s "torture" to deprive a terrorist of sleep or to make him remain in a stress position for a period of time–never mind that the terrorist is refusing to reveal crucial intel that could save lives. 

These authors have frequently cited sources that also claim that 9/11 was an inside job ordered by Bush and Cheney and that the Pentagon was hit, not by Flight 77, but by a missile fired by the U.S. military on orders from Bush and Cheney.

There is little hope that the handful of radical authors who keep posting these misleading articles are going to stop doing so.  But, as long as they keep posting their deceitful attacks, I will keep posting articles that defend the CIA’s interrogation methods, which methods we know from the released interrogation memos themselves saved lives, prevented more attacks, led to the capture of more terrorists, and enabled us to deal some heavy blows to Al Qaeda.

     

Waterboarding Testimony Misleading

By Ronald Kessler (New York Times bestselling author, veteran investigative journalist on the intelligence community, and author of the recent book The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack)

In his confirmation hearings as attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr. gave misleading testimony about waterboarding.

Asked for his views on the coercive interrogation technique, Holder said, “If you look at the history of the use of that technique, we prosecuted our own soldiers for using it in Vietnam . . . waterboarding is torture.”

One soldier was indeed court-martialed in 1968, but what Holder left out was the reason: The military is not authorized to engage in waterboarding, and the individual who was waterboarded was a North Vietnamese soldier. Under the Geneva Conventions, the U.S. would have had no legal right to subject the individual to coercive interrogation.

In contrast, the three terrorists that the CIA waterboarded were not soldiers in uniform, and therefore were not covered by the Geneva Conventions. In addition, the CIA officers who engaged in waterboarding were not rogues who took it upon themselves to use waterboarding. They were authorized to do so by the CIA director, the Justice Department, and the president.

As the interrogations of detained terrorists progressed, the CIA briefed the chairs, ranking members, and majority and minority staff directors of the House and Senate intelligence committees on the details of the procedures used.

Aside from the legalities, the CIA does not believe outright torture produces reliable results and has never used it. Scaring prisoners with waterboarding is another matter. Waterboarding led to a takedown of key al-Qaida operatives when they were planning more attacks. If waterboarding really were torture, the military would not use it on its own special forces as part of their training in case they are waterboarded after being captured.

Many well-intentioned people, including Sen. John McCain, have described waterboarding as torture. But as defined by the dictionary, torture is infliction of pain. As used by the CIA, waterboarding entailed placing a cloth over the face of the subject and pouring water over the cloth. The technique creates the sensation of drowning and therefore fear, but it is painless. The individual awakes the next morning feeling just fine.

While saying he opposes aggressive interrogation, even McCain has acknowledged that in extremis a president might have to approve it. . . . 

According to The Associated Press, Obama is considering requiring the CIA to use interrogation techniques specified by the “U.S. Army Field Manual” while amending the manual with a classified section that would allow the president to authorize techniques not allowed by the military regulations. In fact, since terrorists now know they will not be drowned, it is unlikely the CIA will want to use waterboading again. The CIA has not used it since 2003.

If Holder’s statement about waterboarding was misleading, his defense of President Clinton’s clemency for members of the FALN was even less impressive. Holder said the 16 members of the Puerto Rican nationalist group were convicted of conspiracy and bomb making rather than the actual bombings. By Holder’s standard, Terry Nichols, the Oklahoma City bomber, would now be free.

Waterboarding Is Not Torture

By Jim Meyers

While much is being made of the CIA’s destruction of videotapes depicting the use of waterboarding during the interrogation of terrorists, the technique has actually been little used as a means of extracting information.

Only three terrorists have been subjected to waterboarding, and the technique has not been employed since 2003.

Furthermore, waterboarding should not be considered torture, as some are claiming. Torture is normally defined as the infliction of severe pain, and while waterboarding induces fear because it simulates drowning, it does not inflict pain.

In fact, U.S. special forces are subjected to waterboarding as part of their training in case they are captured and experience the procedure.

Waterboarding was used only when the CIA believed a second wave of terrorist attacks was imminent. But once the media began disclosing that the CIA was using the technique, it became useless, because if terrorists know they will be subjected to fake “drowning,” they will not respond to it.

And when it comes to outright torture, the CIA does not believe it produces reliable results and has never used it, reports Ronald Kessler, chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com.

The three terrorists who were subjected too waterboarding are Abu Zubaydah, Osama bin Laden’s chief of operations; Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the mastermind of the bombing of the USS Cole; and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

In these cases waterboarding and other coercive techniques, such as forcing prisoners to stand for hours, succeeded in extracting intelligence that led to the capture of key al-Qaida operative planning terrorist attack against Americans.

Despite the media’s focus on waterboarding, it is in reality a “non issue,” said Kessler, author of the book “The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack.”

“It hasn’t been used since 2003 and won’t be used again. The media is using it as an excuse to bash the president.

“Waterboarding was employed on only three terrorists who were not cooperating, and the information they ultimately provided helped stave off attacks that could have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people.” (http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Waterboard_Not_Torture/2007/12/10/56046.html)

—————————–

Visit Mike Griffith’s Real Issues Home Page

 

  • Share/Bookmark
Related Products & Services:

Get Your Loan Now Get Your Loan Now Get Your Loan Now Get Your Loan Now Apply for your VA Home Loan Now Apply for your VA Home Loan Now Apply for your VA Home Loan Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now Buy RevvNRG Direct Online Join a Winning Team Join a Winning Team Join a Winning Team Honor and Remember our Veterans Get Educated at Excelsior College Get Educated at Excelsior College Get Educated at Excelsior College

Comments

11 Responses to “Answering the Lie that the CIA's Interrogation Methods Were "Torture"”
  1. Tom Barnes says:

    Give it up Mike!  There are exactly 80 people in the USA who still believe that what was done was not torture. Come into the 21st Century and realize that what we did was evil.

    Stop living in a fantasy world where torture is Godly.  Wake up!

    • Mike Griffith says:

      You live in a fantasy land.  According to recent polls, you are the one who is in the minority, not I.  According to recent surveys, a solid majority of Americans believe it is morally acceptable to waterboard terrorists in order to save lives and prevent further attacks.  Polls also show that a solid majority of Americans do not favor prosecuting former Bush officials for authorizing harsh interrogation methods, since most people understand that those methods saved lives and that they were done at a time when everyone feared more attacks were imminent.  As for the nature of waterboarding itself, the polls are all over the place–it depends on which demographic is being polled.  When a liberal news group does the poll, the numbers say one thing; but when a non-liberal group does the poll, different results are obtained.

      Interestingly, the vast majority of former military personnel who underwent waterboarding as part of their training, and who have expressed an opinion on the subject, have rejected the claim that waterboarding is torture.  I find that quite telling–that most of the people who’ve actually experienced it don’t buy the argument that it’s "torture."

    • duffster says:

      Mike Griffith is a troll posting for the Republican Party.  His articles are not within guidelines of this site.

      We are a progressive group supportive of human rights and individual freedoms.

      g

    • Mike Griffith says:

      No, Gordon Duff is just a paranoid nutjob who thinks anyone who disagrees with him is a "Republican troll."

      Gordon thinks his nutty paranoid rants against Bush and the CIA and so-called "torture" are within the guidelines for this site, but if anyone post articles that refute his nonsense he claims their articles aren’t within guidelines.  He doesn’t mind dishonestly posting pictures that he knows have NOTHING to do with the CIA’s interrogations of terrorists and juxtaposing those photos with his harangues about Bush-Cheney-CIA "torture."

      And on and on we could go.  The man needs clinical help.  I am totally, totally serious.  I truly question his sanity.

      If Veterans Today truly hopes to be more mainstream, it needs to dump embarrassing nutjobs like Gordon Duff.

    • Da_old_warrant says:

      80 People? Are there that many bushies involved and afraid that the world court may try them?

  2. Amy Branham says:

    Mike, which polls would you be referring to?  Can you provide a link for that a few statistics? 

    Waterboarding IS TORTURE, Mike.  It has long been considered torture, even by the U.S., before the Bush/Cheney era. 

     

    • Mike Griffith says:

      I realize this is a matter of religious faith among the far left.  You can say waterboarding is "torture" a million times, but that won’t make it true.  If the U.S. has considered waterboardinig as "torture," then, pray tell, why have we waterboarded tens of thousands of our own military personnel as part of their SERE training?

      I’m still waiting–and waiting and waiting–for one of you folks to explain how waterboarding is "torture" when it’s non-injurious and non-lethal, when it’s applied for no more than 40 seconds at a time (and usually only for about 10 seconds at a time), when it’s done under medical supervision, when strict limits are placed on the number of applications that can be done in a day, week, and month, and when the subjects are advised ahead of time that they will not die from the procedure.  How is THAT "torture"?

      Don’t come back with the phony arguments about WW II-era Japanese waterboarding, which was done in a vicious, sadistic manner.  Don’t come back with the phony argument about the U.S. soldier in Vietnam who was court martialed for waterboarding–he was punished because he was not authorized to use that method, and the way he did it was much harsher than the way the CIA did it.

      Tell me how the waterboarding that the CIA did to Nashiri, KSM, and Zubaydah, described above, is "torture."

  3. Da_old_warrant says:

    MORE NEWSMAX CRAP

  4. Terry says:

    I think maybe sometimes it is good to keep ones opinion to himself. Clearly, most of the people who post here on this site are not in favor of waterboarding. You can call it torture or not, it really doesn’t matter. This truly is a matter of personal concience. As for me, I’m still undecided. I don’t want to see Americans stoop to a lower level, but I don’t want to see them die either. This is a very tough decision to make.

  5. Robert Rosebrock says:

    Duffster writes: >

    None of you are within the guidelines of the “Veterans Today” name. Stop hijacking the noble name of “Veterans” for your own political posturing and running away Veterans who are seeking real answer and real help with their personal lives.

    This website used to be a very unique service to Veterans until the political garbage started flowing. But just like everything else that belongs to Veterans, it’s being stolen away by the politics.

    It won’t be long before this Veterans Today website will be lucky if it has 80 followers. It’s time to put the political posturing on this website aside and start taking care of our fellow Veterans.

    There hundreds, if not thousands of our fellow Veterans who have been infected with AIDS and hepatitis caused by a dysfunctional VA. If anyone does not believe that these individuals will not be living a life of “torture” and meet an untimely death, then you’d better rethink your priorities about “human rights” and “individual freedoms.”

  6. Robert Rosebrock says:

    Regarding my comment

    Duffster writes:

    His (Mike’s) articles are not within guidelines of this site.

    We are a progressive group supportive of human rights and individual freedoms.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

Quick Links: Asbestos & Mesothelioma - Mesothelioma Cancer Center - Mesothelioma Lawyers - Mesothelioma Treatment
Hundreds of thousands of servicemen were exposed to asbestos over decades, especially during the period from 1940 to 1980. Asbestos was used in construction of naval vessels as well as shore facilities. All branches of the military used asbestos, which was also widely used in civilian applications. Asbestos can cause mesothelioma. Because this cancer has a particularly long latency period, many servicemen who were exposed years ago are now developing this disease. - Mesothelioma Patient & Family Resources: Mesotheliomahelp is provided by Belluck & Fox, LLP as a comprehensive resource for mesothelioma victims and their families.  The site provides up-to-date information on the latest news and treatment options as well as an easy to use search feature to find local mesothelioma doctors and health care clinics.  - We fight for veterans harmed by asbestos: Veterans with mesothelioma or asbestos-related lung cancer should know they have options: the opportunity to bring a suit against manufacturers and sellers of the asbestos that caused their illness. If you were harmed by asbestos exposure, for example, in ships or military housing, contact Weitz & Luxenberg to get a free case review. - Important Information for Veterans: Asbestos products were often used on military ships and within military housing, and Veterans may have been exposed. Previous exposure to asbestos is the only known cause of mesothelioma, a fatal cancer that has no cure and affects countless Veterans and loved ones. For more information regarding military asbestos exposure visit Mesothelioma.com