CIA staged mock execution, wielded power drill in interrogations, secret report says

And I say well done! I don't know about you but I believe that these guys had it coming. Just think what they would do to you, an American, on one of their Jihadist websites. I say bravo CIA!

The prisoner confronted with the gun and power drill was identified by current and former U.S. government officials as Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, the alleged plotter of the attack on the U.S. destroyer Cole. Nashiri was also one of three prisoners who was subjected to the simulated drowning interrogation method known as waterboarding. The inspector general's report also describes at least one instance in which the CIA fired a gunshot in a room next door to a detainee in an apparent effort to convince the prisoner that another terrorism suspect had been executed, the official said.

Are we supposed to feel sorry for these dingbats or something? What is the point of making a big deal out of this?

Edited to add the link. I forgot...www.latimes.com...


[edit on 22-8-2009 by jackflap]

Torture never works. It. Never. Works.

The United States could learn a few things from the past....for example their is Vietnam which is an obvious one.
Another one is the French occupation of Algeria and the colonial struggle their for independence in the 1950s. The French tortured many FLN suspects and it got them nowhere.

Torturing people regardless of whether they are suspected "terrorists" or not will get America no where. It's one small step from torturing people to blatant murder. Although it is arguable that is already happening.

reply to post by Kram09


So how then do you propose we get the information from these vermin that will save American lives? Be nice to them and hope they find it in their heart to relay the data we need? Or should we just ignore them altogether and hope that they will go away?

You seem to know quite a bit about the topic. So what do you propose? I mean instead of making nice posts about how torture doesn't work.

reply to post by jackflap


The thing is, if you torture people, they will eventually say anything to stop the pain and even incriminate anybody. Therefore whatever information is gained is unreliable. Torturing people just serves as a recruiting tool for other people to become terrorists.

It's misguided to think that torturing people somehow will help stop terrorism. I think it only fuels more violence.

The United States forfeits any right to be the "good guys" or to hold the moral high ground, when torturing suspects.

reply to post by jackflap
Instead of BRAVO!, you have to ask how the torture helps? It encourages other ***holes to use torture on Western captives. That's called a vicious circle. The point of signing up to Geneva Convention rules of conduct is to ensure that ALL captives (political, war, crime) are treated fairly. If we torture and mistreat our prisoners, we can't complain when others do the same to us. Even worse we can only expect it. Who started the ball rolling? It doesn't really matter any more.

It's a brave move to commit to fair treatment and be seen being fair. From an intelligence point of view, it's a pain the a**. If a bright prisoner knows he's completely safe, he'll never supply information. On the broad scheme of things, fair treatment on all sides could have the longer term benefits. Memories go back way before Guantanamo, right back to before the 90s and into the 70s. That's a lot of resentment against countries like the US and UK. Likewise a lot of resentment for their side too.

reply to post by jackflap


So what's your opinion on the Japanese who waterboarded/tortured US troops during WW2? Would you also also say it was their right to extract information from the vermin in anyway they could? Or, will you be a hypocrite and say it wasn't ok, as the US were the "good guys" ?

And keep in mind that the US executed those Japanese who performed the waterboarding.

So, do the CIA get the same treatment after the 'war on terror' is over?

[edit on 23-8-2009 by noonebutme]

remember that Canadian Muslem the FBI snagged at JFK and forced renditioned him to Syria for torture. SYRIA..?
aren't those folks on our Terrorist State List... WTF..
if we are sending people there for torture... what does that say...?
and if they are our enemy then why would they do this for us...?


[edit on 23-8-2009 by Anti-Evil]

Originally posted by noonebutme
reply to post by jackflap

 

So what's your opinion on the Japanese who waterboarded/tortured US troops during WW2? Would you also also say it was their right to extract information from the vermin in anyway they could? Or, will you be a hypocrite and say it wasn't ok, as the US were the "good guys" ?

And keep in mind that the US executed those Japanese who performed the waterboarding.

So, do the CIA get the same treatment after the 'war on terror' is over?

[edit on 23-8-2009 by noonebutme]

From my point of view, our guys should not have been tortured. We are on the good side and stuff like that shouldn't happen to us. Was it expected? You bet and our guys knew what would happen if they were caught. I can see it all from my point of view. Why look from theirs?

My question still remains though. How would you get the information that will save American lives from these vermin? Make no mistake, these terrorists are vermin, Americans are not so do not blur the line.

As far as the CIA getting the same treatment. I believe they know the old saying, live by the sword, die by the sword. These guys are professional and know the consequences of what must be done.

reply to post by Kandinsky


Very good points Kandinsky. I remember a movie, The Kingdom maybe. In it a foreign intelligence group was showing an American intelligence operative how to extract information from terrorists. This movie was very telling by the way.

They had a terrorist captured who was bound, on his knees in the desert in the middle of nowhere. Very mean looking people around so you would expect the worst. The head of the group tells them to unbound him and he wanted to talk to him.

He takes him to the side and tells him that they had just supplied his mother with money and food. A new television and furniture and let her know that it was because of him.

He asks him if he felt ashamed at how he let his mother live before they intervened. The guy fell apart and became an asset, inside of a terrorist organization. Number one because he now knew that these guys knew all about his family, and number two because they were taking care of them on his behalf! This is brilliant.

Now to that kind of thinking I do say bravo. These are the kind of things I'm trying to discuss. How would you get the information from these vermin that will save American lives?

[edit on 23-8-2009 by jackflap]

All information gained though torture is regarded as the least credible of any information sources by the intelligence community. The only time torture is any good is when you want someone to confess to something they haven't done.Its utterly useless for gaining any solid intel.

The whole thing was done to make it look like they were really after something when we all know the war on terror was BS. This is why Guantanamo bay was so visible, as long as there are people visibly locked up being accused of being terrorists we will all think there still is a threat and wont go questioning anything that's done in the name of the war on terror.

The torture was done for effect only which makes it one of the most evil war crimes ever committed in my book. There was no info to be gained only impressions to be made and people to be fooled..


[edit on 23-8-2009 by VitalOverdose]

reply to post by Anti-Evil


Anti-Evil, there are things that go on that we will never know about. The Syrians may very well have had an interest in this guy too. They more than likely wanted to be seen as doing their part in the war on terror so cooperation with other intelligence agencies goes on all the time. It doesn't matter if we consider them on the state terror sponsor list. This is a way to warm up to the enemies and see what they know and why. It also gives them a glimmer of hope that they will be removed from that list.

[edit on 23-8-2009 by jackflap]

reply to post by VitalOverdose


Very good opinions VitalOverdose. It may have been that they let the information about the torture get out so as to send a message to any want to be terrorists. I am still trying to think outside the box as to how to get the information from terrorists that we need.

reply to post by jackflap
It's complicated, eh? A level playing field is an honest goal. If we use torture, they use torture. The conventions on torture eventually became accepted due to the lack of credible data gained from torture. If people in the West have been disturbed by Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition and Abu Grhaib (sp?) imagine how people in the Middle East see it? Don't forget that most people in the world are just normal men, women and children. They don't have a big axe to grind. The images, stories and claims are damaging. Revenge is promoted.

So how do we get the information without torture? The hardest answer is that we don't. We stop torturing. It's not a question with an easy answer. There will always be situations where torture is seen as a form of last resort. Maybe that's the answer? Keep it illegal and condemn it's use worldwide. In the case of serious exceptions, maybe it would be justified in a Tribunal? I'm against it in principle, but there's difficult exceptions. Likewise, if one country entertains exceptions...all countries will. Square one!

reply to post by Kandinsky


I'm sure there are a lot of emotions involved. I mean here you have a guy that has information that could save American lives and he is not talking because he wants Americans to die. I would be no good at this because I would go the whole Jack Bauer route. A quick side step to the show 24.

It may be illegal, immoral and all that but where do you go? Sodium Pentathol? Psychotronics? Mind control techniques? These are viable, tested and proven but they are immoral and illegal as well.

I just don't see the point in everyone making a big deal out of the fact that these guys may have been tortured. I believe it is put out there as a way for other terrorists to think twice. A mind control technique in its own right.

reply to post by jackflap
I understand your points. I'm not trying to get all detached or holy about it. They're difficult questions. Imagine you can torture a guy for information that can *maybe* save the lives of others. By torturing the guy, you *maybe* save the lives, but cause others to take the terrorist route or torture Western captives. Difficult questions! I'm glad we can discuss it, because right now there's people all over the world making decisions about whether to torture 'that guy' in the back room or cell. Somewhere, somebody is being tortured. Who'd want to make the decisions? Not me.