Calling Waterboarding What It Is: Torture
Former CIA agent John Kiriakou told ABC News that he tortured Abu Zubaydah when he subjected him to waterboarding, but that it was effective because "from that day on, he answered every question... The threat information he provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks."
Now we know, perhaps, part of what was on one of the destroyed tapes. Or maybe not: we now have three stories about Zubaydah's role in 9-11 and the nature of his confessions. Read on: I promise it will give you a headache.
First, Kiriakou's justification for waterboarding does not jibe with reports that Zubaydah was mentally ill. Dan Coleman, then the FBI's top al-Qaeda analyst, said, "This guy is insane, certifiable, split personality."
Kevin Drum has more on Ron Suskind's take on Zubaydah, based on what the CIA found in his diary. From the One Percent Doctrine (2007):
The guy is insane, certifiable, split personality," [Dan] Coleman told a top official at FBI after a few days reviewing the Zubaydah haul....There was almost nothing "operational" in his portfolio. That was handled by the management team. He wasn't one of them...."He was like a travel agent, the guy who booked your flights....He was expendable, you know, the greeter....Joe Louis in the lobby of Caesar's Palace, shaking hands.
And here's the third tale. Gerald Posner reports from his 2003 book Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11:
"Zubaydah is the only top al Queda operative who has secretly linked two of America's closest allies in the war on terror -- Saudi Arabia and Pakistan -- to the 9/11 attacks." In addition, Posner says: "In a short monologue, that one investigator told me was the 'Rosetta Stone' of 9/11, Zubaydah laid out details of how he and the al Qaeda hierarchy had been supported at high levels inside the Saudi and Pakistan governments." All four men he fingered are now dead. (tip)
Einy, meany, miny, moe? Which story do you think holds water?
What about justiying torture? Kiriakou explained, "We were afraid that there was another major attack coming." That doesn't jibe, either. When was Zubaydah captured? In Pakistan in early 2003. Oh, wait. Kiriakou drank the drums-of-war brand of kool-aid?
Today, Kiriakou thinks waterboarding should be part of the "national debate." Indeed it should. As should all of these conflicting stories about Zubaydah's role in 9-11. Time for hearings, Congress. Maybe a special prosecutor, Mr. Attorney General.
I'll go out on a limb here and predict that there will be a designated jailee or two (like Iran-Contra or Watergate) and that no higher up heads will roll. For more information, see
Comments
Waterboarding is just fine by me, the rabid conservative.
You lefties can sit on your principles. I’d rather save lives, U.S. lives mainly.
C
You seem to be worrying about a merely irritating tactic(waterboarding), which neither kills nor harms the “tortured”, but which is applied to an enemy who slowly cuts off our people’s heads. What are you, self-immolating?
I have an important information for you:
Ex-CIA agent, John Kiriakou is a terrorist, a member of Al-Kaida. You don’t beleive that? Make you a waterboarding test with him, and you will see!! He will confess that, I am sure!!
Torture is a tough issue, because there are strong arguments on both sides.
See “Should America Torture Muslims Suspected Of Plotting Terrorist Attacks?”
http://muslimsforasafeamerica.org/?p=13
Muslims For A Safe America encourages honest and informed discussion about how to make Muslims and America safer.
Posner’s account has now been independently corroborated by Pulitzer-prize winner James Risen of the New York Times, in his book State of War (p. 187). You can read all about it in “Part 4″ here:
www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com
Whether or not this was the real reason the tapes were destroyed is anyone’s guess, but there is certainly more to this story than meets the eye.
U.S. interrogation techniques are NOT torture, period. Those who are saying differently are incompetent or asserting propaganda for political benefit at the cost of American citizens. No, matter your political party affiliation, and setting aside your thoughts on issues. We all need to remember what it is to be an American Citizen. We need to make sure our elected representatives obey their Oath of Office and keep their Oath of Allegiance. See http://tinyurl.com/2znnvl Know whom you are voting for.
A human life is a human life. Does the laws change for these “suspects”? If i were arrested tomorrow I surely wouldnt want my head held under water or any other type of inhumane so called strategy done to me. I know that we are in the middle of a war. I understand we were under attack. But what does torturing these ppl do other than further anger them? We still have troops in these countries who in my opinion pay the price everyday for whatever happens to detainees. My thing is, if you have evidence and proof of wrong-doing, why the need to interrogate especiallly under those circumstances. I understand these ppl have a job to do and we are dealing with dangerous ppl. But how does making them mad or putting them in embarrassing situations suppose to make them talk? How do you sleep at nite knowing that you did that to somebody? How does your conscience allow you to make it through each day? Just my opinion, but regardless of ANY situation NOBODY, deserves to be tortured. We dont even really know the real story. If everything was as innocent as they said it was and done by the boook, there would have never been a need to destroy those tapes. Looks like once again, somebody hiding something for whatever reason.
Z,
So let me get this straight? Suppose you have a child and that child is being held hostage by Al Qaeda. Your child will be beheaded by noon the nest day but the CIA captures an Al Qaeda suspect who is high up in AQ and it’s highly likely he knows where she’s being held. Do you waterboard or do just walk away?
These are the questions that most lefties avoid. I’m sure you or any other lefty will not answer the question directly. But, that’s the question on the table. Go.
C
Hi! I can’t post messagte here…
:-(
google
In democracy It is not enougth to have democratic purposes and ideas. Democraty means, our purposes reach
with democratic and legal means. In democracy the end don’t justifies the means. It is very important to
know, please!!!!
It is a beatiful mean to save my kidney-sick mother? Yes, it is. Can I somebody kill for his organ, only
to save my mother? No I can not!
Is it a legal purpose to be rich? Yes it is. Can I hard work for my purpose? Yes I can, is is a legal mean
to be rich. Can I steal for my purpose? No I can not, its is a unlegal mean!
So, please to see, the means make the democracy and not only the purposes.
Who is a criminal? A criminal is somebody who will his purpose reach with means out law.
Who is a policeman? The policeman is somebody who fight against criminal WITH LEGAL MEANS. If the policeman
uses unlaw means, he is not more a policeman but an other criminal.
Also please don’t say you, we can make unlaw acts to save lives! Where is the end for this logic? Wi can
kill one man to save Ten… We can kill ten people to save hundred pepole … Wi can kill hundred people to save thousand … If you say that, you say : it is not problem, an very efficient to be criminal without
moral, if we fight agains criminal.
An that is not more a “good boys fight against bad boys” it is more like as “sicilian mafia fight against
napoletan mafia.”
Chuck Manson says:
So let me get this straight? Suppose you have a child and that child is being held hostage by Al Qaeda. Your child will be beheaded by noon the nest day but the CIA captures an Al Qaeda suspect who is high up in AQ and it’s highly likely he knows where she’s being held. Do you waterboard or do just walk away?
I’m sorry but you use the same logic, as the other site for his criminal. With those logic the terrorist explains his terroristic, unlaw acts:
He is saying an other criminal/terrorist:
So let me get this straight? Suppose you have a child and that child is killed from the bomb of US Army.
Do you makes attempts or do just walk away?
Terrible!
Please be human even if the other site is not. That is the difference between you and the other site, you don’t want be different?
Walt,
You answered my question with a question. A question is not an answer, it’s another question.
I also stated no one(you) would answer the question directly. You made my point. Thanks.
C
“So let me get this straight? Suppose you have a child and that child is being held hostage by Al Qaeda. Your child will be beheaded by noon the nest day but the CIA captures an Al Qaeda suspect who is high up in AQ and it’s highly likely he knows where she’s being held. Do you waterboard or do just walk away?
These are the questions that most lefties avoid. I’m sure you or any other lefty will not answer the question directly. But, that’s the question on the table. Go.”
Charles –
Of course you waterboard. And no right thinking individual should raise a word of complaint.
I’ve answered your question. Perhaps you could answer mine. When has a situation as you’ve outlined ever occured? The President outlined four plots in his defense of harsh interrogation. Which of these plots were a ‘ticking bomb’?
Chuck –
Here are the President’s words:
“In this new war, the enemy conspires in secret — and often the only source of information on what the terrorists are planning is the terrorists themselves. So we established a program at the Central Intelligence Agency to question key terrorist leaders and operatives captured in the war on terror. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us stop a number of attacks — including a plot to strike the U.S. Marine camp in Djibouti, a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into Library Tower in Los Angeles, California, or a plot to fly passenger planes into Heathrow Airport and buildings into downtown London. Despite the record of success, and despite the fact that our professionals use lawful techniques, the CIA program has come under renewed criticism in recent weeks. Those who oppose this vital tool in the war on terror need to answer a simple question: Which of the attacks I have just described would they prefer we had not stopped?”
–President Bush, speaking on October 23rd
Hello Chuck!
Thanks for answering!
I made no waterboarding bacause I am a man with much questions!
Have I the real criminal? Don’t say please that it is possible exact to know in advance.
It is the best method to resolve the problem? Don’t say please that it is possible exact to know in advance.
Make I an reason to torturing my child or another child later? “We are torturing your child bacause you
haved torturing Mustafa”.
So first, please:
Waterboarding do not resolves problem, torturing makes problem. It gives also justifying to enemy to make the same.
So second, please:
Can I kill in Amerika the killer of my child? No I can not! If I do that, I am criminal!
Can you waterboarding in Amerika if your child is being held hostage by an american citizen?
Or it is important the name? If the name of criminal is Joe we don’t waterboarding him.
If the name of criminal is Mustafa we waterboarding him.
Is this diferent so important that we are law-abiding or not?
And the third, please
IT is not important if I made a waterbaording or not. But it is important to know that this is something more like as vendetta, and nothing something of legal act.
Your question is for one envolved person. But the law don’t enable to participate who is taken/involved from
the act. Think an jurors,or judge.
And we speak from the Law, how does work, an not from the reaction of one envolved person! That is not the
same!
I think, you mix the argumentations of envolved persons with the task of State and Law!!
Thanks for reading!
RT,
” When has a situation as you’ve outlined ever occured?”
Nearly every day. We have about 160,000 children stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan that are subjected to these type of conditions nearly every day. They may not be under 18, but they are someone’s child and I for one would gladly put some Mooslim on the rack to save my child or yours.
I don’t understand your “ticking bomb” question and what it has to do with waterboarding? Is it a rhetorical question?
C
Walt,
Uh, I have no idea what you just posted?
I’m still waiting for your answer to my question? No need to reply with anything else until you answer my question. Then we can move forward.
If you think that by answering my question with an honest answer will undermine your argument, just say so and we’ll move on.
C
Chuck –
It’s not rhetorical.
The situation that you described was a ‘ticking bomb’.
“Your child will be beheaded by noon the nest day but the CIA captures an Al Qaeda suspect who is high up in AQ and it’s highly likely he knows where she’s being held.”
You’ve got to get vital information from someone before the child is beheaded, i.e. a ticking bomb. A very specific situation.
“They may not be under 18, but they are someone’s child and I for one would gladly put some Mooslim on the rack to save my child or yours.”
As would I. However, there is a big difference between putting ’some Mooslim’ on a rack and putting ‘a high AQ suspect with information’ on the rack.
Again, when has that situation ever occurred?
Hello chuck!
I made no waterboarding bacause I am a man with much questions!
This is not an answer?
To answer your question Chuck. It wouldnt really matter would it? Because if you believe that these guys are as heartless as the government say they are, chances are…she will be beheaded regardless. So taking another life would accomplish what? Nothing. Because I still wouldnt get my daughter back. Secondly, say they waterboard the guy, tick him off and he gives the wrong information…again i ask…what have you accomplished? Nothing. All we have is their word that it happen that way, but because the tapes were destroyed we have no idea. We dont know half of what they did to that man or if he was actually guilty of what he was accused of. Thats the point thats trying to be made. Burning evidence suggest that something is being hidden. Why? Answer that. This will be my last comment toward you. I will not sit here and go back and forth with you. You have your opinion and i have mine. We’re adults remember…agree to disagree.
Rt,
Apparently when they captured Zubaydah is when.
I don’t get your line of questioning? If you have a point, make it.
Walt,
Sorry, no reply till you answer my question. A question is not an answer. Here in the U.S. or even where you come from.
Z,
You also made my point with your question in place of an answer. Answer the question on the table and we can move on to your questions.
C
Hello Chuck!
I am from Hungary,from EU, thanks!
Maybe I don’t understand You, I’m sorry for my bad English!
You have questioned:
Do you waterboard or do just walk away?
I have answered:
I don’t waterboard!
And reached fort:because I am a man with many questions!
Please, going we from beginning.
Before me is Ali. And somebody from American Goverment say to me: This is Ali. He Knows where is your child.
Ali say now: No I dont Know!
The Geverment say: You must him waterboard to know the truth.
And now what can I do??
I dont believe Ali because I don’t know him!
I dont believe the goverment because I know him! They lied and lied all the time about weapons of mass destruction and about much more!!
I am afraid that we are not so white and clean in the “war on terror” as they say us. For this I am unhappy and confused. I envy you for your picture of black/white world, without doubt!
Thanks for the conversation, guys. ‘
Chuck, your hypothetical is flawed on so many levels — as RT pointed out, there have been no examples of a ticking bomb, much less a kidnapped child. Moreover, parents don’t have the power to make such a decision.
Walt, I think that your association of vendetta and torture is interesting — one is retribution and the other before-the-fact.
RT, thanks for the ticking bomb points.
Z, interesting argument in that last post.
I’m exploring this in depth for tomorrow.
Chuck –
FTR, I don’t have a huge complaint with the waterboarding of Abu Zabaydah or KSM. I sincerely wish that the CIA had chosen a legal, more effective, interrogation technique. However, I don’t have a large beef with them.
“Apparently when they captured Zubaydah is when.”
Nope. It doesn’t come close to matching your scenario. Consider:
“Your child will be beheaded by noon the nest day”
With respect, there is no way that Abu Zabaydah’s interrogators could have known of any time constraints or anyone in imminent danger.
“the CIA captures an Al Qaeda suspect who is high up in AQ”
Okay. Abu Zabaydah qualifies.
“it’s highly likely he knows where she’s being held.”
Again, there is no way that could have been known.
When Abu Zabaydah was first captured, he talked. When the information flow slowed, he was waterboarded. Afterwards, ther was all kinds of information. Terrorist plots involving model airplanes and cows. Al Quada involvement in the assassination attempt on Pope JP2, both Kennedy assassinations, the death of Malilyn Monroe.
Did we get anything useful out of Abu Zabaydah? Possibly. KSM was captured with information from Abu Zabaydah. It would be interesting to know whether it was before or after the waterboarding.
BTW, in post 14 of this thread, you can read Bush’s list of terrorist plots that were disrupted due to the CIA interrogation program. None of them were imminent.
We tortured Abu Zabaydah on a fishing expedition. As we did to hundreds of poor shmucks in Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, and Afghanistan. Some were factually, not just technically, innocent. At least one such innocent was tortured to death. Probably more.
BTW, while he was in US custody, Saddam Hussein was never tortured. If torture is effective, don’t you think that he would have been strapped to a waterboard?
Go figure.
USP,
I had to bring the conversation down to a level a parent could understand since I believe none of us is in combat in the theatre of operation. Surely an intelligent person such as you could equate the example to the battlefield?
Maybe not?
Maybe this example/scenario spells it out much better for you?
The FBI/CIA/Homeland Security raid a home in a Los Angeles suburb. They do this on a tip and proof that some kind of terrorist type activities are being carried out.(heaven forbid it might be from a wire tap)
They find the makings of a dirty bomb and discover there were two bombs but one is gone? During the raid they capture two suspects living in the home and evidence on computers that both bombs were to be planted and detonated soon.
Do you waterboard the suspects or just beg them to tell you who has the bombs and where they might be now?
It’s highly likely that even if you get some info it won’t be reliable and even if it is, the terrorists may be long gone or change to a different plan.
But, what do you do Ms Gill? Beg or torture? 60,000 lives may depend on your answer.
I have every confidence you won’t give me a direct answer but I won’t beg!
C
RT,
Hundreds tortured at Gitmo, abu Ghraib and Afghanistan? I’d like to know your evidence of this?
I think the question is this, do we take away a tool that may someday save lives? In the case where someone develops a dirty bomb or even a nuclear device and smuggles it across the mexican border? Do we take away this tool because there is no emminent danger or “ticking bomb”?
I’d rather not. I get one vote, you get one vote.
C
Walt,
Sorry buddy but it’s late and I just can’t understand what you are trying to say? Maybe next time.
C
Chuck –
“Hundreds tortured at Gitmo, abu Ghraib and Afghanistan? I’d like to know your evidence of this?”
Forgive me, in the interests of clarification, you are not questioning that it has happened? You are just questioning the numbers? Would I be correct?
Sure. If you wish, I’ll look for links in the morning. Perhaps I can find General Petraeas’ letter from May reminding the troops in Iraq that torture is illegal. Possibly I can find the 2006 USSC Hamdan decision giving GWOT detainees Geneva protections. If you have time, find the Kabul cab driver who was dragged from his vehicle, hung up in a stress position, hosed down, left overnight in freezing temperatures, and was dead in the morning. By US servicemen. They are being prosecuted for it. BTW, he was totally innocent.
“I think the question is this, do we take away a tool that may someday save lives?”
Take away a tool? Torture is illegal. It always has been.
“In the case where someone develops a dirty bomb or even a nuclear device and smuggles it across the mexican border?”
You know, one of the stories about the waterboarding of KSM and Abu Zabaydah was that Bush had incorrect information that a nuclear weapon was already on American soil. I wish that he had made that case. Instead, his defense is in post 14.
“Do we take away this tool because there is no emminent danger or “ticking bomb”?”
Again, you present an extreme case. If there is a nuclear or dirty bomb, of course you waterboard. And the President stands before us and tells us why he did it. And no right thinking person should raise an objection.
Torture is illegal. It should be used rarely, only in the most extreme circumstances, and only with the highest level of approval. No law enforcement officer should arrest the individuals involved. No prosecutor should charge. No jury should convict. It should be apparent to even the most jaded eyes that torture was the correct action. As it is, the poor CIA schlubs who did the actual torture will probably pay the price for Abu Zabaydah. And no one else.
Instead, torture is endemic. It has been in every branch of the service, in every theater of operation. It has been, too often, a first response, not a last. Alkl danger was imminent. All situations were a ticking bomb. How could you know unless you torture?
Remember, “we do not torture.”
You’re question was answered. It may not be the answer that YOU wanted, but it was answered. But since you need for it to broken down in simple terms, No I wouldnt. I dont believe in an “eye for an eye”. Like I stated, doing that could have major consequences. As a parent i couldnt in good judgement allow that. I would not be the reason my child suffered even more than she probably had already. Even though I would want to do more. What parent in the right mind would put their child at further risk? Nobody. You are very argumentive person. Everyone has answered your questions. You are the only one basically going in circles. Throwing a small tantrum because you’re not getting the answer’s you want. Happy Holidays to you.
Dear uspolitics :
Thanks for reaction!
You have reacted after my brief with “lied”. Maybe it was to hard to say, im sorry!
Don’t told the truth - that is better…
Vendetta is an unlegal retribution! Who makes the wendetta think, he is justified, but he break the law!
Torture is an unlegal act before the fact. Who makes the torture think, he is justified, but he break the law! That is the raising for comparison.
What I want to say in democracy “to halt law” must not to hang from the qvalitet or qvantitet of criminal.
Democracy has egual law for all people.
If I say I can break the law for saving lives, there is not more democracy.
I know these argumentations much better als you! I heared long time in Hungary that our security is more inportant as human rigths, under previous politic system. And I think we are in Hungary freeded from, what are you building now in Amerika.
Rt said: “It should be used rarely”
Thank you.
C
Z,
You’re a man of principle Mr Z but I really don’t believe you. I believe you would do what any other normal human would do and that is to do anything to protect your children.
Merry Christmas to you.
C
when american soliders are captured is waterbording still going to be ok.
Remember the USA is the country that is involved in every war there is.
Chuck said:
“I’m sure you or any other lefty will not answer the question directly.”
“I have every confidence you won’t give me a direct answer but I won’t beg!”
You’re welcome.
Hi, Walt:
“Vendetta is an unlegal retribution! …
Torture is an unlegal act before the fact.”
Yes - I was looking at the sequence, not the illegality. Thanks for the clarification.
And thank you for being willing to engage in conversation in a language that is not your own.
Chuck — your rhetoric is incredibly condescending and passive aggressive. I present as evidence:
“I had to bring the conversation down to a level a parent could understand since I believe none of us is in combat in the theatre of operation. Surely an intelligent person such as you could equate the example to the battlefield?
Maybe not?”
I can’t decide if you are consciously acting thusly or if this is simply how your mind works. In either case, it is not conducive to conversation. Walter’s broken English is more conducive to conversation — as he is focused on explaining his point of view, not bludgeoning others.
Kathy
Carl - are you aware that we (our government) is refusing to declare that it would be torture if Iran waterboarding an American airman?
USP,
My bludgeoning was only directed towards you. Don’t drag the other respectable folks into this.
Speaking of conducive conversation, your constant attempts to mold the conversations on your blog isn’t conducive for a free flowing dialogue.
For some reason you seem to come into conversations and deflect them into directions never intended by the posters. I mean this as no attack, but do you have ADD? You cannot stay on topic or track a thread? I can’t be the only one who has noticed this?
C
Chuck, you dont have to believe me. If your child was in danger,would you not knowing what the situation was, willing do something stupid that could have a negative drastic effect? Would you really put your child at further risk? Thats a question that a parent would have in a situation like that. My wife on the other hand, may react differently. Im the calmer one. The topic of this blog is “Calling waterboarding what it is: Tortue”. So no matter what you say, the fact remains that it is tortue. For you to say that its deserving is wrong, especially not knowing the situation. Since you’re so good at asking questions, here’s a hypethetical one for you. Say for instance, our troops were holding a detainee, and one of the “terrist groups” captured some of our soldiers in order to get one of theirs back. Would they be in their right to Waterboard or use in excessive violence to get information on where the person or persons were being held?
Just because the author calls it torture and you call it torture doesn’t make it torture. Making these creeps uncomfortable doesn’t bother me at all.
I would try not to do anything stupid and I believe waterboarding someone who had direct knowledge of the incident wouldn’t be stupid. You can assert all you want, but it doesn’t make it so.
No they wouldn’t be in their right since we wouldn’t be on the verge of beheading the detainee. His life would not be in danger. Bad example Z. Most likely this detainee could end up at gitmo eating honey glazed chicken and rice pilaf. Then watch a movie and the next morning get up and play a little basketball with his cellmates. Rough life eh?
C
Chuck said:
Most likely this detainee could end up at gitmo eating honey glazed chicken and rice pilaf. Then watch a movie and the next morning get up and play a little basketball with his cellmates. Rough life eh?
C
Oh, How terrible/ridiculously naiv!!!
At end I will hear it is a summer/holiday resort!! Good to know, thanks Chuck !!
Hello Chuck!
LEt me again.
You say: The american goverment dont let the human right groups to visit Guantanamo, bacause the goverment dont will that human right groups see how good lives the so called enemies of country.
Let me precise.
I see, maybe my writed text is not exact.
Naiv is your explanation not you in person.
Hi, Walter — no need to apologize. However, you are more kind than I am in thinking that the comment reflects naïveté. I think the comment smacks of sophistry. If the comment had been made by RT, I’d think it reflected sarcasm.
Gee Walt, I really thought I was making some headway with you? Maybe you’re right, let’s release these nice Gitmo folks in your country? Sounds good to me.
C
Hello Chuck!
I dont know if these Gitmo folks are nice or not.
I dont know about they nothing just what the gowerment say.
They are allready never before judge.
Do you know something about role of judicature in democracy?
Hello Chuck!
I asked after, it is possoble that gitmo folks come in our country.
I become the answer that, if it is true that how you described,
“Most likely this detainee could end up at gitmo eating honey glazed chicken and rice pilaf. Then watch a movie and the next morning get up and play a little basketball with his cellmates.”
then they live in gitmo so an beautiful high life standard, that our poor land, a simile high life nivo, can not assure.