Should civilized nations use "Enhanced Interrogation" techni

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . (ass/u/ming that's your pic), . . .

That's my picture, although a few rounds of chemo and immune suppressant drugs have changed me a bit these past few years. I'm probably still recognizable now that my hair has grown back in (for the third time);)

. . . you look surprisingly like a chemistry teacher I once had . . .

Pl-ease. Do you have to insult me so? As a good physicist, I know that chemistry is a trivial application of quantum mechanics which is beneath my notice. ;)

. . . he was a pompous ass . . .

So, the resemblance was more than physical.

. . . although it's clear I'm a heck of a lot more academic than he ever thought. (Mature, maybe not.)

I could say something nice here, but I've a reputation to maintain.:)

--Pete

[Zenda]

I didn't expect 'sexual humiliation' techniques to go as far as rape, but ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...-show-rape.html

"At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee."

[kandrathe]

I didn't expect 'sexual humiliation' techniques to go as far as rape, but ...

The criminal behavior at Abu Garib was not "enhanced interrogation". It was a rogue group of ill disciplined and badly trained soldiers acting as prison guards and having their jollies at the expense of their prisoners. Unfortunately, the brass in charge of that fiasco got away with a hand slap, while the soldiers committing the atrocities faced court martial and most received sentences, although light ones in view of what they did to their prisoners. The interrogations at Gitmo were handled by professionals, which is scary in the whole Gestapo sense.

I'm sure that you, the entire middle east, and others interested in disinformation will associate Abu Garib and Guantanamo as equal, but in fact they are not.

[Thecla]

The criminal behavior at Abu Garib was not "enhanced interrogation". It was a rogue group of ill disciplined and badly trained soldiers acting as prison guards and having their jollies at the expense of their prisoners. Unfortunately, the brass in charge of that fiasco got away with a hand slap, while the soldiers committing the atrocities faced court martial and most received sentences, although light ones in view of what they did to their prisoners. The interrogations at Gitmo were handled by professionals, which is scary in the whole Gestapo sense.

I'm sure that you, the entire middle east, and others interested in disinformation will associate Abu Garib and Guantanamo as equal, but in fact they are not.

You seem here to be commiting the fallacy of assuming it's an "either-or" thing.;)

Just because Abu Ghraib is not the same as Guantanamo, does not means it's unnconnected. I would say all these things --- CIA torture, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib etc. flow from the same set of polices, originating at the highest level of the government and the military, and are part and parcel of the same problem.

I could write a lot about this, but I'll just make a couple of small points.

First, sexual humilation was used at Guantanamo. For example, one of the "professional" female interrogators smeared what was (likely fake) menstrual blood on a prisioner --- something that's extraordinarily insulting to a Muslim especially (and I think it might have been during Ramadan). I found it interesting in Khalid Sheik Mohammed's account how conerned he was about the presence of female interrogators (he almost sounded more insluted about that than being waterboarded). David Hicks also reported being sexually abused while at Guanatanamo. I'm too lazy to look for other reports. Anyway, my guess is that the ideas for sexual humiliation of prisoners at Abu Ghraib came from the outside, where they were taken to extremes by some sadistic guards with less than average intelligence, and ignored by their officers because the rules books had been thrown away.

Second point: the report notes that the pictures of rape and sexual abuse come from six other prisons in Iraq, not just Abu Ghraib. That alone shows you it was a systemic problem not just a few guards getting their jollies and a few commanding officers who failed to control them.

[kandrathe]

I do believe that humiliation is a part of the "enhanced interrogation" regime, although there is a boundary that is not crossed when it is done "professionally". But, you are correct in that under the Bush administration, the boundaries (both geographic and moral) were unclear, and probably left unclear intentionally which communicated the wrong message to the ranks of would be interrogators. Then you mix in the traditional barbarity of the locals in the extra judicial prisons off US soil, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that some people (or even many people) crossed that "professional" line.

But, I know what you mean about Hicks. That is why for my annual check ups now, I insist on having female doctors torture me. :)

[Zenda]

But, you are correct in that under the Bush administration, the boundaries (both geographic and moral) were unclear, and probably left unclear intentionally which communicated the wrong message to the ranks of would be interrogators.

Not that I believe this is what largely happened, but that doesn't make those interrogators look better. Having followed orders would at least give them a (moral) excuse of sorts: experiment has shown that people are willing to do worse things as they would do normally, when asked by by a perceived authority.

[Zenda]

Iran is holding an Iranian American woman, Roxana Saberi, on drummed up charges of spying. Where is the liberal outrage?

Viewing this in relation to the subject of the thread...

Drummed up charges or not, meanwhile she has been released and returned home unmolested. Luckily for her, the Iranians ('civilized' or not) decided not to wring a confession out of her, nor information about secret plots against their country.

Regarding the absence of liberal outrage: maybe many liberals realized how it would look?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roxana_Saberi

"American civil right activist Glenn Greenwald, while stating his belief that Saberi's conviction was improper, has pointed to the hypocrisy of American reporters who rallied to Saberi's defense but have been silent about the plight of journalists like Sami Al-Haj, an Al Jazeera cameraman who was held for six years in Guantanamo by the U.S. government. Al-Haj’s imprisonment received nearly no news coverage."

[Thecla]

I do believe that humiliation is a part of the "enhanced interrogation" regime, although there is a boundary that is not crossed when it is done "professionally".

Ah! Good. Perhaps we can have a discussion (with Pete --j/k Pete ;)) on when sexual humiliation techniques (ok, I know you only referred to "humiliation" in your comment, but I was referring specifically to "sexual humiliation" at Guantanamo) cross that tricky gray area from "professional" to "unacceptable." Bare breasts, well that sounds ok. Menstrual blood smearing: probably not, unless done by a CIA officer with proper written permission. Sodomizing prisoners: sounds bad, but perhaps it's not torture if it's only done a few times? Building pyramids of naked prisoners: definitely verboten, especially if you take photos.

But, you are correct in that under the Bush administration, the boundaries (both geographic and moral) were unclear, and probably left unclear intentionally which communicated the wrong message to the ranks of would be interrogators.

Actually, I'd say the problem with the Bush administration wasn't a lack of clarity. They were very clear that interrogation techniques could be pushed very far out from previously accepted boundaries, far past point where they included torture, and that any "enemy combatant" picked up in the "war on terror" was essentially without rights. They gave the interrogatorial ranks exactly the idea they intended to communicate, and were qwuite clear that killing prisoners was not allowed (that being a bit of a dead giveaway). But you can hardly blame a few of the less swift members among the lower ranks for failing to realize that rape was not an allowed option either.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Perhaps we can have a discussion (with Pete --j/k Pete ;)) on when sexual humiliation techniques cross that tricky gray area from "professional" to "unacceptable."

Sexual torture of all types have been part of "professional" torture techniques pretty near always (the Inquisition being an exception -- fornication, apparently is a sin, other torture is not). Some of the biggest users of those techniques are the Islamic nations since Islam makes the Roman Catholics look like swingers. The more repressed a society, the more effective sexual torture is because the of the embarrassment factor. That axis runs from "amateur" to "professional" -- and the professionals do what it actually takes.

The "acceptable" to "unacceptable" axis is different. And, in my opinion, none of it is acceptable.

One is a question of effectiveness, the other of justice and morality. Don't confused them. B)

. . . "war on terror" . . .

This is a (I sometimes think 'the') fundamental problem. War on terror. War on poverty. War on drugs. War on damned near everything. Bah!

"War" is too often misused. The problem with calling something a "war" is that it sets up a mind set. That mind set is right for invasions but not necessarily right for criminal acts. Bombs and guns and tanks are fine for taking ground but you need a target for using them. Terrorists and drug dealers don't make good targets for military hardware. They make great targets for police proceedings. Wrong solution to the problem.

Yep. The whole processes, including torture and random invasions work so well that Osama Bin Laden has been captured, tried, and jailed for years; Al Qaeda is completely shut down; and the Taliban is on the run. Oh, wait, none of that is true. That's what happens when the wrong solution is applied to a problem.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

Drummed up charges or not, meanwhile she has been released and returned home unmolested. Luckily for her, the Iranians ('civilized' or not) decided not to wring a confession out of her, nor information about secret plots against their country.

She was lucky, I guess, and maybe being a political hot potato she was treated differently. Have you heard of the book, "The New Islamist Man: The Political Prison in Iran by Chahla Chafiq?

Excerpt; <blockquote>"A woman's rape is frequently the last act that precedes her execution. This is explained by the rule in Iranian political prisons that the sentence of execution cannot be carried out if the woman is a virgin. Since there is a theological belief that if a woman dies a virgin she will go to heaven, the politically active virgin is forced to "marry" before her execution and thus to insure she will go to hell. She is forced to "marry" the hangman who will carry out her execution."</blockquote>

"American civil right activist Glenn Greenwald, while stating his belief that Saberi's conviction was improper, has pointed to the hypocrisy of American reporters who rallied to Saberi's defense but have been silent about the plight of journalists like Sami Al-Haj, an Al Jazeera cameraman who was held for six years in Guantanamo by the U.S. government. Al-Haj’s imprisonment received nearly no news coverage."

You mean the "camera man" who was traveling with $220,000 in cash?

[kandrathe]

... but I was referring specifically to "sexual humiliation" at Guantanamo...

Unfortunately, we will probably never get to see the *real* evidence, and all I've seen are allegations, which might be true, or might be propaganda to convince those who want to believe the worst. Me? I'd like to see an investigation into any possible misconduct.

But you can hardly blame a few of the less swift members among the lower ranks for failing to realize that rape was not an allowed option either.

Sure I can. I would hold any soldier or civilian accountable for their illegal actions. There is no place in any US military manual that allows for any type of sexual assault.

[Zenda]

She was lucky, I guess, and maybe being a political hot potato she was treated differently.

Yes, that undoubtly helped. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to help for those in American custody.

Have you heard of the book...

No, I had not. Why do you ask? I don't see a connection between a book on Khomeini's reign and the current situation. Roxana Saberi isn't executed. Besides, I'm not sure we should take *everything* that some bittered and homesick man in exile wrote for granted, when Khomeini's funeral was visited by 2 million people.

You mean the "camera man" who was traveling with $220,000 in cash?

Is there a US or international law against travelling in Asia with lots of cash? Apparantly not, because he was released without charge.

[kandrathe]

Yes, that undoubtly helped. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to help for those in American custody.

We don't view terrorists as bargaining chips, which is actually what arresting Roxana Sabari was about.

No, I had not. Why do you ask? I don't see a connection between a book on Khomeini's reign and the current situation. Roxana Saberi isn't executed. Besides, I'm not sure we should take *everything* that some bittered and homesick man in exile wrote for granted, when Khomeini's funeral was visited by 2 million people.

Yet, you will believe the complaints of terrorists. Stalin's funeral on Red Square was attended by upwards of 4 million people. And... your point about personality cults was? Do you think that "popular" tyrants do not murder or torture people?

Is there a US or international law against traveling in Asia with lots of cash? Apparently not, because he was released without charge.

Yes, actually. I think the limit is $10,000. The allegations against him were that he was transporting the money to aid a terrorist organization, which also is against the law.

[Jester]

The allegations against him were that he was transporting the money to aid a terrorist organization, which also is against the law.

Well, they took six years to come up with something, anything, and they came up dry. Do you think, maybe, that if there was some actual basis for their "allegations", they might have at least charged him with the crime? Rather than lawlessly interrogating him over and over and over to try and rake up some muck on Al Jazeera?

You point to Stalin above; surely then you are aware of how "allegations" can be summoned up to throw just about anyone in prison, and that the test of guilt is in an open and fair court, not a prison cell in a military base.

-Jester

[Zenda]

Yet, you will believe the complaints of terrorists. Stalin's funeral on Red Square was attended by upwards of 4 million people. And... your point about personality cults was? Do you think that "popular" tyrants do not murder or torture people?

I was told not to put words in anyones mouth, and I'm doing my best to avoid it. You might consider doing the same.

There is no need to believe the complaints of terrorists. There are photos that show how *suspects* of terrorism were treated while in American custody.

[Ashock]

I was told not to put words in anyones mouth, and I'm doing my best to avoid it. You might consider doing the same.

There is no need to believe the complaints of terrorists. There are photos that show how *suspects* of terrorism were treated while in American custody.

Notice how they all have their heads. Also, arms and legs.

Maybe you forgot about those?

Can't fight an enemy with both hands tied behind your back. Well, you can... but you will lose. Ahh, but maybe we should appease them some more, make more concessions, lie to ourselves about them changing.

No wonder you europeans have been responsible for 2 world wars. Hitler should have been crushed right away, but you closed your eyes and appeased him some more. Appeasement, 'till it kills you.

As far as I'm concerned, no european has any right to tell ANYONE about how to handle themselves with their enemies, since you yourselves have no clue. Well, except call the US to help when everything is totally FUBARed.

[Jester]

Notice how they all have their heads. Also, arms and legs.

Maybe you forgot about those?

Can't fight an enemy with both hands tied behind your back. Well, you can... but you will lose. Ahh, but maybe we should appease them some more, make more concessions, lie to ourselves about them changing.

No wonder you europeans have been responsible for 2 world wars. Hitler should have been crushed right away, but you closed your eyes and appeased him some more. Appeasement, 'till it kills you.

As far as I'm concerned, no european has any right to tell ANYONE about how to handle themselves with their enemies, since you yourselves have no clue. Well, except call the US to help when everything is totally FUBARed.

I think that might be the most impressive Godwin I've seen yet.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

I think that might be the most impressive Godwin I've seen yet.

I believe the essence of a Godwin is a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis. I saw no comparison. Simply the historically accurate statement that the Europeans appeased Hitler and the opinion that that appeasement was a mistake.

--Pete

[Jester]

I believe the essence of a Godwin is a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis. I saw no comparison. Simply the historically accurate statement that the Europeans appeased Hitler and the opinion that that appeasement was a mistake.

But it is a comparison. "The situation between America and its enemies today is of a kind with the situation between the Europeans and Hitler. Europeans botched it with appeasement back then, therefore nobody should listen to them now."

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

But it is a comparison. "The situation between America and its enemies today is of a kind with the situation between the Europeans and Hitler. Europeans botched it with appeasement back then, therefore nobody should listen to them now."

Sorry, should have been clearer. The comparison needs to be *to* Hitler or the Nazis. For instance, "you are a vegetarian, so was Hitler, thus you're wrong" or "the Nazis were against private ownership of guns, so are you, thus you are a Nazi and therefor evil".

If you are looking for a real flaw, consider *two* world wars and the appeasement of Hitler.

But, whatever. This pile of glue has long lost all meaning.

--Pete