Author Topic: CIA Played Larger Role In Advising Pentagon:HArsh interrogation methods defended  (Read 750 times)

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22723
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
By Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 18, 2008; Page A01
A senior CIA lawyer advised Pentagon officials about the use of harsh interrogation techniques on detainees at Guantanamo Bay in a meeting in late 2002, defending waterboarding and other methods as permissible despite U.S. and international laws banning torture, according to documents released yesterday by congressional investigators.

Torture "is basically subject to perception," CIA counterterrorism lawyer Jonathan Fredman told a group of military and intelligence officials gathered at the U.S.-run detention camp in Cuba on Oct. 2, 2002, according to minutes of the meeting. "If the detainee dies, you're doing it wrong."

The document, one of two dozen released by a Senate panel investigating how Pentagon officials developed the controversial interrogation program introduced at Guantanamo Bay in late 2002, suggests a larger CIA role in advising Defense Department interrogators than was previously known. By the time of the meeting, the CIA already had used waterboarding, which simulates drowning, on at least one terrorism suspect and was holding high-level al-Qaeda detainees in secret prisons overseas -- actions that Bush administration lawyers had approved.

The new evidence, along with hours of questioning of former Pentagon officials at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee yesterday, shed light on efforts by top aides to then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to research and reverse-engineer techniques used by military survival schools to prepare U.S. service members for possible capture by hostile forces. The techniques -- sensory deprivation, forced nudity, stress positions and exploitation of phobias, such as fear of dogs -- would eventually be approved for use at Guantanamo Bay and would spread to U.S. detention facilities in Afghanistan and Iraq, including the Abu Ghraib prison. Nearly all were later rescinded.



The newly released documents show that in the summer of 2002, Pentagon officials compiled lists of aggressive techniques, soliciting opinions from the CIA and others, and ultimately implementing the practices over opposition from military lawyers who argued that the proposed tactics were probably illegal and could harm U.S. troops.

The memos and other evidence evoked intense bipartisan condemnation from members of the Armed Services Committee who spent nearly eight hours grilling some of the former and current officials involved with the decisions.

"The guidance that was provided during this period of time, I think, will go down in history as some of the most irresponsible and shortsighted legal analysis ever provided to our nation's military and intelligence communities," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.).

Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), the committee chairman, asked: "How on Earth did we get to the point where a United States government lawyer would say that . . . torture is subject to perception?"

One of the most explosive memos was the account of the October 2002 Guantanamo Bay meeting in which the CIA's Fredman joined 10 Defense Department officials and lawyers to discuss how to extract better intelligence from detainees there. Fredman, whose agency had been granted broad latitude by Justice Department lawyers to conduct harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists, listed key considerations for setting a similar program at the Cuban prison. He discussed the pros and cons of videotaping, talked about how to avoid interference by the International Committee of the Red Cross and offered a strong defense of waterboarding.

"If a well-trained individual is used to perform this technique, it can feel like you're drowning," he said, according to the meeting's minutes, which do not provide a verbatim transcript.

Fredman said medical experts should monitor detainees. "If someone dies while aggressive techniques are being used, regardless of the cause of death, the backlash of attention would be severely detrimental," he was quoted as saying.

CIA spokesman George Little declined to comment on the remarks attributed to Fredman. "The far more important point is the fact that CIA's terrorist interrogation program has operated on the basis of measured, detailed legal guidance from the Department of Justice," he said. "The agency program, which has been carefully reviewed within our government, has disrupted terrorist plots and saved innocent lives."

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22723
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
They understand whats at stake.....big boy rules for a big boy war.
L

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22723
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
They understand whats at stake.....big boy rules for a big boy war.

Yeah torturing people for years without charging them.

Sexual abuse?


No better then terrorist.

Maybe even lower.

A the best you have to say is big boy rules?

pathetic. 

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Ozmo read my torture thread...ur a sheep unwilling to do what is required to protect this country. Thats fine, there are those of us who are and will keep u safe.
L

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22723
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Ozmo read my torture thread...ur a sheep unwilling to do what is required to protect this country. Thats fine, there are those of us who are and will keep u safe.

By not charging people, detaining them for years and torturing them sexually?


Why don't you address that instead of hiding behind your "We are the only ones that will do what's needed" shield like a coward.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Dude..here it is my friend..these people are not US citizens or criminals...they don't have rights under US law. They don't have rights under US law. Some are enemy combatants and have certain rights. Others are terror suspect and have nothing. I don't care what happens to them. Its not my concern. Sleep well knowing what whatever info is coming from these idiots is keeping u safe.
L

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22723
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Dude..here it is my friend..these people are not US citizens or criminals...they don't have rights under US law. They don't have rights under US law. Some are enemy combatants and have certain rights. Others are terror suspect and have nothing. I don't care what happens to them. Its not my concern. Sleep well knowing what whatever info is coming from these idiots is keeping u safe.

Sexual abuse. HH6.

Run forest run.  Are you gonna justify that one too?    ;D

And on top of all that, they are still people, that look to be NOT guilty as they were never charged and released.