Abu Ghraib Techniques Developed, Approved at Gitmo
Sunday July 17, 2005
As I noted earlier this week, the bouncing ball that is the Karl Rove story has deflected attention from a variety of events, not the least being Gitmo. On Thursday, DefenseLink released the "Schmidt" report (pdf), after Wednesday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing to "receive testimony on the Investigation into FBI Allegations of
Detainee Abuse at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Detention Facility."
You should download and read (at least scan) the 29-page report. Most of the FBI allegations are substantiated, but ruled "authorized." Some eye witness allegations -- such as "improperly chain[ing] detainees and plac[ing] them in a fetal position on the floor" -- are rendered null and void, not because they are proved false, but because investigators were "not able to find any evidence to adequately assign responsibility for these actions." (Don't you love bureacratic-ese?)
Review the treatments of one "high value" detainee (p 18-20): using Military Working Dogs ... sleep deprivation ... isolation ... putting collar and leash on the prisoner ... subjecting to sexual taboos (standing naked in front of a female, wearing women's undergarmets). These are all judged "authorized" techniques (some after the fact). Where did you first hear/read about these methods? Abu Ghraib. These "interrogation techniques" have the seal of approval from the President (it's his signature) ... suggesting they had a seal of approval when deployed in Iraq, protestations (rogue soldiers) to the contrary.
Andrew Sullivan has a detailed review of the report. He writes (emphasis added):
You should download and read (at least scan) the 29-page report. Most of the FBI allegations are substantiated, but ruled "authorized." Some eye witness allegations -- such as "improperly chain[ing] detainees and plac[ing] them in a fetal position on the floor" -- are rendered null and void, not because they are proved false, but because investigators were "not able to find any evidence to adequately assign responsibility for these actions." (Don't you love bureacratic-ese?)
Review the treatments of one "high value" detainee (p 18-20): using Military Working Dogs ... sleep deprivation ... isolation ... putting collar and leash on the prisoner ... subjecting to sexual taboos (standing naked in front of a female, wearing women's undergarmets). These are all judged "authorized" techniques (some after the fact). Where did you first hear/read about these methods? Abu Ghraib. These "interrogation techniques" have the seal of approval from the President (it's his signature) ... suggesting they had a seal of approval when deployed in Iraq, protestations (rogue soldiers) to the contrary.
Andrew Sullivan has a detailed review of the report. He writes (emphasis added):
The kind of techniques used in Abu Ghraib - sexual humiliation, hooding, use of dogs, tying prisoners up in "stress positions", mandatory nudity, humiliating prisoners for their religious faith, even the famous Lynndie England leash - were all developed at Guantanamo Bay under the strictest of supervision. What we were told were just frat-guy, crazy techniques on the night shift - had been deployed by the best trained, most tightly controlled, most professional interrogation center we have. The Schmidt report argues that, while some of this was out of bounds, it was only because of some extra creativity, not because the techniques themselves were illicit, or unauthorized by Rumsfeld and Bush. Abu Ghraib is and was policy - just policy absorbed by ill-trained, unprofessional hoodlums. But those hoodlums didn't get their ideas from thin air. They got them from the Pentagon and the White House.Tags:: Abu Ghraib, GITMO, Politics, Terrorism