

A nonpartisan, independent review concludes U.S. Engaged in Torture After 9/11 - denzil_correa
http://detaineetaskforce.org/

======
richardjordan
From the "no shit, Sherlock" files?

I mean, I don't mean to be flippant - or perhaps I do, it's late - but I
genuinely didn't think there was still that much debate on this.

It's not like the Bush administration denies that they engaged in torture,
they merely play semantic games by redefining the torture they engaged in as
not-torture. Now we have some distance and are able to remind ourselves that
this not-torture is actually, ya know, torture, then there's not really much
left to debate is there?

That is actually a question, because I'd love to hear responses from folks who
haven't internalized that the US did indeed engage in torture - and I am not
attacking you for it if that's the case. I've possibly been laboring under a
wildly inaccurate assumption.

~~~
willurd
"I genuinely didn't think there was still that much debate on this"

You'd be surprised. Many people will deny anything happens until
CNN/NBC/Fox/Insert-Big-Media-Company-Here tells them otherwise. Because of
that, we need more things like this, more sources of information we can point
to and say "do you believe us now?"

Also, any time an official refuses to look into the past, in this case because
it's not productive to "look backward", that's a pretty sure sign that
somebody is hiding something (and this report proves it). No educated person
on the planet truthfully believes that knowing and understanding the past is
unproductive. Not one.

------
hingisundhorsa
As Obama said, it is not productive to look back at our behavior. I mean, how
horrible, what if we look back at what we did and analyze ourselves. "God"
forbid, we might feel guilty or responsible. Heck, we might even learn not to
repeat our mistakes, or worse prevent them in the future and who would want
that to happen.

~~~
yardie
> "God" forbid, we might feel guilty or responsible.

If it's anything like previous immoral incidents give it 30-50 years. After
all guilty parties have died off and any claims of restitution undeliverable.
Look at slavery, the gov't only recently apologised for that act.

------
andyjohnson0
Some further reading:

"Report on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the
transportation and illegal detention of prisoners" prepared by the European
Parliament (2009) [1].

"Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition" by the
Open Society Justice Initiative (Feb 2013) [2]

[1]
[http://www.europarl.europa.eu/comparl/tempcom/tdip/final_rep...](http://www.europarl.europa.eu/comparl/tempcom/tdip/final_report_en.pdf)
[PDF]

[2] [http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/globalizing-
to...](http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/globalizing-torture-cia-
secret-detention-and-extraordinary-rendition)

------
Ankaios
Quite impressive and disturbing. I am glad to see the report. What I'd really
like to see, though, are some indictments.

~~~
willurd
It's been over 10 years since we've had an impeachment. I'd say we're overdue.

------
denzil_correa
You can sign up for a free .epub or .mobi version of this report to be
available at the end of April.

<http://detaineetaskforce.org/report/ebook/>

------
jacquesm
The report is interesting, but what will be even more interesting is whether
or not the US will have the strength to draw conclusions from this report and
to hold those responsible accountable.

~~~
veidr
It won't be interesting, as the answer is clear already: _absolutely not_.

Unless you mean in like a hundred years, when all participants are dead.

------
sharkweek
_Much of the torture that occurred in Guantánamo, Afghanistan and Iraq was
never explicitly authorized. But the authorization of the CIA’s techniques
depended on setting aside the traditional legal rules that protected captives.
And as retired Marine generals Charles Krulak and Joseph Hoar have said, “any
degree of ‘flexibility’ about torture at the top drops down the chain of
command like a stone — the rare exception fast becoming the rule.”_ (p12,
abridged version)

What are these conversations normally like? Sort of a "Do what you can to get
any information out of the suspect as I turn around and plug my ears." ?

I hate how they say this stuff isn't authorized from some high level.

 _"...Lawyers provided novel, if not acrobatic interpretations to allow the
mistreatment of prisoners."_ (p13, abridged version)

~~~
rdtsc
> Sort of a "Do what you can to get any information out of the suspect as I
> turn around and plug my ears." ?

I would imagine so. There has to be a non-verbal or symbolic channel of
communicating that then provides official deniability.

As an example take discrimination and at-will employment. Let's say the owners
want to fire a gay guy. They can't fire him officially because of various
discriminatory laws so they maybe invent a non-verbal or a code word
'restructuring' so they lay him off due to restructuring.

In general part of operating in large bureaucratic institution is to learn:

* what rules can be broken (break them if you like but don't force the management to make an official statement on it and don't ask permission on paper)

* what rules should be broken ("you need to torture this guy and it is illegal so we'll just use a euphemism -- 'interrogation' you know what I mean, I know you know what I mean, but we can never write that down in an email")

* what rules cannot be broken, official and un-official (some things are never tolerated what these are have to be discovered carefully as these might not all be written down, say who can disagree with the boss during a requirement meeting... it is not written down but if you are part of the wrong group, you won't fare well)

~~~
aranazo
A frequent method of torture by US forces is to threaten to turn a captive
over to allied domestic Police or Army forces. It is useful to look at the
relevant UN conventions to understand what the legal definition of torture
actually is.

------
denzil_correa
For people questioning "Why" this investigation was conducted, here's a
statement from the task force

    
    
        The events examined in this report are unprecedented in U.S. history. In the course of the 
        nation’s many previous conflicts, there is little doubt that some U.S. personnel committed brutal 
        acts against captives, as have armies and governments throughout history. 
        But there is no evidence there had ever before been the kind of considered and detailed 
        discussions that occurred after September 11, directly involving a president and his top 
        advisers on the wisdom, propriety and legality of inflicting pain and torment on some 
        detainees in our custody.

------
pvaldes
Where is the big surprise? Is called Guantanamo... and Egypt/Libia/Siria's
secret jails. Everybody knows that.

------
adventured
Not only did it happen, but it has been made official policy, relabeled as
enhanced interrogation. There are very few in Congress or the White House
willing to denounce it at this point.

