Senate torture report

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Senate torture report

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Didn't see a thread, so go ahead and discuss rectal feeding and water boarding in here.

http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/study2014/sscistudy1.pdf

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 19:59

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 14, 2024 02:51

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Page 16 footnote says "Juma gul who was released with a payment of $[redacted] and other currency."

Is this saying they paid him off?

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 20:47

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Farmer Crack-rear end posted:

Oh, you left out the part where [CIA OFFICER 1] literally got a cash bonus four months after that, for "consistently superior" work, and got to skip the practical portion of his formal interrogation certification thanks to his "past experience with interrogations".

The bonus is pretty absurd, though I'm inclined to agree with the footnote that questioned the wisdom of punishing a junior officer, likely in his early 20s, while letting everyone else off that condoned it.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 21:52

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

NoEyedSquareGuy posted:

Probably an obvious question, but is there any reason to perform the whole "rectal rehydration" procedure besides being able to laugh about how you just funneled a bunch of hummus up some guy's rear end?

It accomplishes nothing that an IV couldn't.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 22:12

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Looking at the appendix, there are three people, Zarmein, Bismullah, and Adel, with only one name listed. Makes me wonder if they don't have last names or if the US just don't know anything about these random people it's captured. Based on footnote on page 15 which says Zarmein is one of the detainees about whom it knew "very little" and the fact that they've all been released, it makes you wonder why they even captured them in the first place.

euphronius posted:

This is really bad.

Even worse is that they knowingly held two totally innocent people, one of whom was mentally ill, to use them as leverage against their families. One of them was held for 18x days, the other for 3x days.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 00:14

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

New Division posted:

Given that even the Church Commission ultimately failed to permanently tamp down CIA malfeasance, I don't know why anyone expects that they won't proceed to do similar things in the future. One thing's for sure, there's nothing resembling the Church Commission on the way. The general desire seems to be to quickly forget this or deny that it was even a bad thing.

I mean, the last 6-8 years indicate pretty clearly that the US isn't interested in capturing terrorists /torturing detainees anymore, it just kills them. That could change, but if you read some of the excerpted emails, they seemed to think it was way too messy and problematic pretty early on. It produced limited intelligence and resulted in dozens of detainees they had to hold onto indefinitely.

quote:

CTC Legal stated that the prospect that the CIA "could hold [detainees] forever" was "terrifying," adding, "[n]o
one wants to be in a position of being called back from retirement in however many years to go figure out what do
you do with so and so who still poses a threat." See November 13, 2001, Transcript of Staff Briefing on Covert
Action Legal Issues (DTS #2002-0629).

quote:

CIA draft talking points produced a month later state that transfer to Department of Defense or Department of Justice custody was the "preferred endgame
for 13 detainees currently in [CIA] control, none of whom we believe should ever leave USG custody."
[quote]

[quote]
"CIA urgently needs [the President of the United States] and Principals
Committee direction to establish a long-term disposition policy for the 12
High-Value detainees (HVD)s we hold in overseas detention sites. Our liaison
partners who host these sites are deeply concerned by [REDACTED]^�^ press
leaks, and they are increasingly skeptical of the [U.S. government's]
commitment to keep secret their cooperation.... A combination of press leaks,
international scrutiny of alleged [U.S. government] detainee abuse, and the
perception that [U.S. government] policy on detainees lacks direction is
eroding our partners' trust in U.S. resolve to protect their identities and
supporting roles. If a [U.S. government] plan for long-term [detainee]
disposition does not emerge soon, the handful of liaison partners who
cooperate may ask us to close down our facilities on their territory. Few
countries are willing to accept the huge risks associated with hosting a CIA
detention site, so shrinkage of the already small pool of willing candidates
could force us to curtail our highly successful interrogation and detention
program. Fear of public exposure may also prompt previously cooperative
liaison partners not to accept custody of detainees we have captured and
interrogated. Establishment of a clear, publicly announced [detainee]
'endgame' - one sanctioned by [the President of the United States] and
supported by Congress - will reduce our partners' concerns and rekindle their
enthusiasm for helping the US in the War on Terrorism."^^^

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 00:57

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

It certainly has its own problems, I just doubt we're going to see another detainee program starting up any time soon.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 01:08

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Party Plane Jones posted:

How exactly is Guantanamo a secret CIA prison?

They had their own secret annex.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 01:20

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Stultus Maximus posted:

Seriouspost: I would love to see Uruguay or Sweden or someone arrest Eric Holder or Barack Obama the minute he sets foot outside the US come 2017.

Yep, Sweden would have great standing.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 04:41

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

They detained and rendered a dissident to Libya.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 04:44

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

New Division posted:

Honestly, from just a practical perspective the government should break up the CIA. It's got a legacy of horrendous failures. And I think that other existing government agencies could pick up most of the legitimate work that is supposed to be done there.

I don't see it. That ignores how much of this comes from policymakers. Read Jack Goldsmith or Barton Gellman's books on this period. There was huge demand from Cheney and parts of the White House to authorize this.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 04:45

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

fade5 posted:

At first glance this seems horrible, but after thinking about it, I honestly wonder if this won't be a net improvement for the dude. Libya's in the midst of a civil war and there's barely a "government" left, so rather than throw him in a Libyan prison they might just end up turning the dude loose so that they don't have to feed, clothe, and constantly guard him. Now, he's still gonna be stuck in Libya with no real way forward.

E: Or did this happen some time in the past, like back when Gaddafi was still in power?

Back in 2004.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 21:07

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

I hate to sound like a neocon here, but what was the Senate's rationale for not actually interviewing anybody? Seems like an odd decision unless nobody at the CIA or in the White House/DoJ was willing to talk.

# ¿ Dec 11, 2014 00:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 14, 2024 02:51

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

The DoJ investigation legally prohibited the Senate from conducting interviews? edit: Forgot how long this has been going on, didn't realize they took place concurrently

I totally agree that the documents themselves are more than enough proof about what happened, but there's always more that doesn't make it into the documents.

# ¿ Dec 11, 2014 00:23

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Senate torture report