Condi should speak out against water-torture.
Ducking prisoners under water to make them talk - "water-boarding" - isn't baptism - it is torture and it is unacceptable.
CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described
Sources Say Agency's Tactics Lead to Questionable Confessions, Sometimes to Death
Enhanced interrogations have been authorized for about a dozen high value al Qaeda targets -- Khalid Sheik Mohammed among them. According to the sources, all of these have confessed , none of them has died , and all of them remain incarcerated. (ABCNEWS)
By BRIAN ROSS and RICHARD ESPOSITO
Nov. 18, 2005 Harsh interrogation techniques authorized by top officials of the CIA have led to questionable confessions and the death of a detainee since the techniques were first authorized in mid-March 2002, ABC News has been told by former and current intelligence officers and supervisors.
They say they are revealing specific details of the techniques, and their impact on confessions, because the public needs to know the direction their agency has chosen. All gave their accounts on the condition that their names and identities not be revealed. Portions of their accounts are corrobrated by public statements of former CIA officers and by reports recently published that cite a classified CIA Inspector General's report.
Other portions of their accounts echo the accounts of escaped prisoners from one CIA prison in Afghanistan.
"They would not let you rest, day or night. Stand up, sit down, stand up, sit down. Don't sleep. Don't lie on the floor," one prisoner said through a translator. The detainees were also forced to listen to rap artist Eminem's "Slim Shady" album. The music was so foreign to them it made them frantic, sources said.
Contacted after the completion of the ABC News investigation, CIA officials would neither confirm nor deny the accounts. They simply declined to comment.
The CIA sources described a list of six "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" instituted in mid-March 2002 and used, they said, on a dozen top al Qaeda targets incarcerated in isolation at secret locations on military bases in regions from Asia to Eastern Europe. According to the sources, only a handful of CIA interrogators are trained and authorized to use the techniques:
1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.
2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.
3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.
4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.
5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.
6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.
According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess.
"The person believes they are being killed, and as such, it really amounts to a mock execution, which is illegal under international law," said John Sifton of Human Rights Watch.
The techniques are controversial among experienced intelligence agency and military interrogators. Many feel that a confession obtained this way is an unreliable tool. Two experienced officers have told ABC that there is little to be gained by these techniques that could not be more effectively gained by a methodical, careful, psychologically based interrogation. According to a classified report prepared by the CIA Inspector General John Helgerwon and issued in 2004, the techniques "appeared to constitute cruel, and degrading treatment under the (Geneva) convention," the New York Times reported on Nov. 9, 2005.
It is "bad interrogation. I mean you can get anyone to confess to anything if the torture's bad enough," said former CIA officer Bob Baer.
Larry Johnson, a former CIA officer and a deputy director of the State Department's office of counterterrorism, recently wrote in the Los Angeles Times, "What real CIA field officers know firsthand is that it is better to build a relationship of trust than to extract quick confessions through tactics such as those used by the Nazis and the Soviets."
One argument in favor of their use: time. In the early days of al Qaeda captures, it was hoped that speeding confessions would result in the development of important operational knowledge in a timely fashion.
However, ABC News was told that at least three CIA officers declined to be trained in the techniques before a cadre of 14 were selected to use them on a dozen top al Qaeda suspects in order to obtain critical information. In at least one instance, ABC News was told that the techniques led to questionable information aimed at pleasing the interrogators and that this information had a significant impact on U.S. actions in Iraq.
According to CIA sources, Ibn al Shaykh al Libbi, after two weeks of enhanced interrogation, made statements that were designed to tell the interrogators what they wanted to hear. Sources say Al Libbi had been subjected to each of the progressively harsher techniques in turn and finally broke after being water boarded and then left to stand naked in his cold cell overnight where he was doused with cold water at regular intervals.
His statements became part of the basis for the Bush administration claims that Iraq trained al Qaeda members to use biochemical weapons. Sources tell ABC that it was later established that al Libbi had no knowledge of such training or weapons and fabricated the statements because he was terrified of further harsh treatment.
"This is the problem with using the waterboard. They get so desperate that they begin telling you what they think you want to hear," one source said.
However, sources said, al Libbi does not appear to have sought to intentionally misinform investigators, as at least one account has stated. The distinction in this murky world is nonetheless an important one. Al Libbi sought to please his investigators, not lead them down a false path, two sources with firsthand knowledge of the statements said.
When properly used, the techniques appear to be closely monitored and are signed off on in writing on a case-by-case, technique-by-technique basis, according to highly placed current and former intelligence officers involved in the program. In this way, they say, enhanced interrogations have been authorized for about a dozen high value al Qaeda targets Khalid Sheik Mohammed among them. According to the sources, all of these have confessed, none of them has died, and all of them remain incarcerated.
While some media accounts have described the locations where these detainees are located as a string of secret CIA prisons a gulag, as it were in fact, sources say, there are a very limited number of these locations in use at any time, and most often they consist of a secure building on an existing or former military base. In addition, they say, the prisoners usually are not scattered but travel together to these locations, so that information can be extracted from one and compared with others. Currently, it is believed that one or more former Soviet bloc air bases and military installations are the Eastern European location of the top suspects. Khalid Sheik Mohammed is among the suspects detained there, sources said.
The sources told ABC that the techniques, while progressively aggressive, are not deemed torture, and the debate among intelligence officers as to whether they are effective should not be underestimated. There are many who feel these techniques, properly supervised, are both valid and necessary, the sources said. While harsh, they say, they are not torture and are reserved only for the most important and most difficult prisoners.
According to the sources, when an interrogator wishes to use a particular technique on a prisoner, the policy at the CIA is that each step of the interrogation process must be signed off at the highest level by the deputy director for operations for the CIA. A cable must be sent and a reply received each time a progressively harsher technique is used. The described oversight appears tough but critics say it could be tougher. In reality, sources said, there are few known instances when an approval has not been granted. Still, even the toughest critics of the techniques say they are relatively well monitored and limited in use.
Two sources also told ABC that the techniques authorized for use by only a handful of trained CIA officers have been misapplied in at least one instance.
The sources said that in that case a young, untrained junior officer caused the death of one detainee at a mud fort dubbed the "salt pit" that is used as a prison. They say the death occurred when the prisoner was left to stand naked throughout the harsh Afghanistan night after being doused with cold water. He died, they say, of hypothermia.
According to the sources, a second CIA detainee died in Iraq and a third detainee died following harsh interrogation by Department of Defense personnel and contractors in Iraq. CIA sources said that in the DOD case, the interrogation was harsh, but did not involve the CIA.
The Kabul fort has also been the subject of confusion. Several intelligence sources involved in both the enhanced interrogation program and the program to ship detainees back to their own country for interrogation a process described as rendition, say that the number of detainees in each program has been added together to suggest as many as 100 detainees are moved around the world from one secret CIA facility to another. In the rendition program, foreign nationals captured in the conflict zones are shipped back to their own countries on occasion for interrogation and prosecution.
There have been several dozen instances of rendition. There have been a little over a dozen authorized enhanced interrogations. As a result, the enhanced interrogation program has been described as one encompassing 100 or more prisoners. Multiple CIA sources told ABC that it is not. The renditions have also been described as illegal. They are not, our sources said, although they acknowledge the procedures are in an ethical gray area and are at times used for the convenience of extracting information under harsher conditions that the U.S. would allow.
ABC was told that several dozen renditions of this kind have occurred. Jordan is one country recently cited as an "emerging" center for renditions, according to published reports. The ABC sources said that rendition of this sort are legal and should not be confused with illegal "snatches" of targets off the streets of a home country by officers of yet another country. The United States is currently charged with such an illegal rendition in Italy. Israel and at least one European nation have also been accused of such renditions.
People who torture are hated and will be fought against. If you want to make friends instead of enemies then don't torture.
There seem to be a lot of allegations flying around in the media at the moment about CIA organised "extraordinary rendition" - moving prisoners to countries where states will torture - and so called "water-boarding".
It is all very troubling and although I have no idea what, if anything, has been going on, I would like to hear Condi speaking out more clearly against all forms of torture, anywhere in the world.
Interview With Barbara Slavin and Ray Locker of USA Today
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
November 28, 2005
(3:25 p.m. EST)
MS. SLAVIN:Let's begin, I guess, with Iraq. You said last week you thought you'd need fewer troops there next year than there are this year. If the next Iraqi government comes in and requests a timetable for us to leave, would we provide a timetable?
SECRETARY RICE:Well, we are clearly going to work with the new Iraqi government when it is in place, but I would just note that Iraqi governments to this point have felt the need for a multinational force. That's why they requested the UN to provide a mandate for that force and then that mandate was rolled over just very recently. So of course we're working with the Iraqis.
But the point that I was making was simply that Iraqi security forces are getting better. And the President has always said that when Iraqis can stand up, we'll be ready to stand down.
MS. SLAVIN:But there's a bit more pressure, it seems, coming certainly from popular opinion in this country and also from the Iraqis in Cairo.
SECRETARY RICE:But clearly everybody wants this mission to succeed and so you have to have an effects-based or results-based approach to any discussion of how security is going to be provided. And it is increasingly provided by more Iraqi forces in the lead, more Iraqi forces able to hold territory, Iraqi forces securing the airport highway, for instance. And so they are taking more and more of the functions.
MS. SLAVIN:But you do anticipate that there is going to be a drawdown next year?
SECRETARY RICE:Well --
MS. SLAVIN:I mean, the Pentagon has said that, you know, it'll go back down to 138,000 certainly after the elections and then the hope is to get it down to about 100,000 by the end of the year?
SECRETARY RICE:The President will take from his commanders their assessment of what the conditions permit, what Iraqi security forces are capable of doing, and then determine troop levels.
MR. LOCKER:I'd like to ask you about the EU developments today. There was one of -- an EU minister saying there may be sanctions on some of the member nations for hosting what they call the secret CIA prisons there. How has this situation in the last couple weeks complicated your job in dealing with some of the European countries?
SECRETARY RICE:Well, I've been very clear, as have other members of the Administration, that we are fighting a war on terror, that there are demands of that that we have to meet, that we have to meet in order to protect not just ourselves but to protect others. Unfortunately, Europe has had its share now of terrorist incidents, in Spain and in Great Britain. And so we are all working together through law enforcement cooperations, intelligence cooperation, to try and produce the very best outcome to protect innocent citizens. And I think that is what we have to keep our eye on.
MS. SLAVIN:But these are prisons where terrible things have happened, according to a number of accounts.
SECRETARY RICE:Well, first of all, I think we have to be careful in assessing what is going on in detention. When you come to Abu Ghraib, nobody would by any stretch of the imagination condone what happened at Abu Ghraib. People were punished for it. People should have been punished for it. It was -- I don't care whether you were operating under the Geneva Conventions or the President's dictate; it was wrong. And so that was very, very clear.
There have been other cases where there have been reports of abuse. Those have been investigated and will be investigated whenever those reports come up. And I would just note that one of the really important differences that the world is learning about how democracies deal with this, as opposed to how dictatorships deal with it, is that in open societies where you have an open press, where you have young soldiers who will go to their commanders and say something wrong is happening there, as was the case in Abu Ghraib, that you have checks and balances and you have protections against that kind of thing.
MS. SLAVIN:Do --
SECRETARY RICE:So yes --
MS. SLAVIN:If I can interrupt, because time is short.
MS. SLAVIN:Do you agree with Vice President Cheney then that there should be an exception for the CIA from certain international and -- international norms?
SECRETARY RICE:The President is --
MS. SLAVIN:And doesn't -- what does that do for our public diplomacy?
MS. SLAVIN:Then why the objection to the McCain --
SECRETARY RICE:We are working with Congress. As you know, Senator Graham has also had legislation. I believe we need the Congress in this fight because this is our joint responsibility to protect the American people and these are hard issues. We haven't ever fought a war like this before. We've never fought a war before where you are -- or certainly we don't, when we pick law enforcement actions, where you can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them because if they commit the crime, then thousands of innocent people die.
MS. SLAVIN:You know, though, what this has done for public diplomacy efforts and the way people are using this issue. Does that -- that has to concern you.
SECRETARY RICE:I do know how people are using the issue and I constantly remind people that, first of all, we are in a difficult war against a new kind of enemy and that we do have an obligation to protect our citizens as well as protect other citizens; secondly, that the President has been very clear that he will not countenance behavior and activities that are outside our laws and outside our international obligations. And when something goes wrong, as it has on occasion, as it did at Abu Ghraib, that's something that sickened all of us, that we're going to be absolutely forthright about it and punish people who engaged in it.
The US Senate and people like Senator John McCain have been speaking out, giving a lead and Condi should be up there with them.
US Senator McCain vows to keep fighting for torture ban
Sun Nov 6, 3:42 PM ET
WASHINGTON, Nov 6 (AFP) - United States Senator John McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, said he would keep up his campaign for legislation banning the torture of prisoners, despite a veto threat from.
McCain, appearing on the "Fox News Sunday" television program, showed no sign he was ready to back away from his proposal outlawing torture that has drawn bipartisan support.
Asked how far he was willing to push the issue over the objections of the White House, McCain, who belongs to Bush's Republican party, said: "As far as necessary."
McCain said the measure enjoys widespread support among US voters and former senior national security officials and retired military officers, including former career soldier and diplomatwho served as Secretary of State during Bush's first term.
"We had a vote in the Senate of 90 to nine. (An) overwhelming majority of the American people do not approve of this kind of exemption. People ranging from Colin Powell to literally every national security advisor or chairman of the Joint Chiefs have said that we can't do this kind of thing," McCain said.
The Senate last week reaffirmed its support for McCain's amendment after having voted 90-9 a month ago to "prohibit cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of persons in the detention of the US government," according to the text of the measure.
To become law, the lower legislative chamber, the House of Representatives, would have to approve it and the president would have to sign it.
The Bush administration opposes the measure and has lobbied for an exemption for employees of the( and other administration officials have argued that US interrogators must be granted flexibility when questioning terrorist suspects but they maintain current policies do not permit torture.
McCain said US credibility had been severely damaged by scandals involving detainees inand elsewhere and that an explicit ban would help soldiers in the field and salvage the country's reputation.
"I hope that we can reach some kind of conclusion that would prevent us from ever doing that (using torture), and I don't have to tell you or anybody who's watching, our image in the world is suffering very badly, and one of the reasons for it is the perception that we abuse people that we take captive," McCain said.
McCain said the US could learn from the example ofwhich he said is waging an effective battle against terrorist threats while operating under a ban on torture mandated by a court ruling.
"The Israelis, who literally face terrorist attacks on a daily basis -- their Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that they wouldn't do that. The Israelis don't do it, and they're very, very effective in countering terrorist attacks on their country," he said.
Not only does cruel and inhumane treatment violate US values and traditions, it has proved ineffective and "doesn't work", McCain maintained
"Somehow the Israelis and people who are very good at this business will tell you that psychological tactics is what gains information."
We know that Rice's and Bush's hearts are in the right place - against torture - but there are so many rumours flying around, on both sides of the Atlantic, that now is the time to be clear beyond any doubt - we should condemn torture in all it's forms.
Peter Dow, Owner, Rice for President Yahoo Group
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.