According to human rights lawyer John Sifton, the CIA tortured some of its detainees in the War on Terror so severely that it had to take measures to keep them alive so they could continue being tortured.
Sifton, who is the executive director of One World Research, told an interviewer for Russia Today that there was both a CIA detention program and a military detention program and that “The CIA program was by far the most secretive. … That’s the one that only had a few dozen detainees at any given time — but it’s the one that saw the biggest abuses, the most serious forms of torture.”
Ok. What Sifton is getting at is that both the CIA and the military had separate ‘interrogation’ programmes. The military one was a bit rough and ready and many of the detainees died under duress. The CIA one was more planned and methodical, but with few deaths. The implication is that they used methods to keep the detainees alive during torture. This seems to be mostly speculation, but the interview (below) does contain some interesting information on the whole sick taxpayer funded system of detainee abuse.
is this really news?
in my eyes this stuff is all covered by the broad defenition of torture, which we know goes on.
So its a lie now? I thought torture was necessary and justified?
A legacy of the Cheney administration.
The former fascist regime has weakened America’s position to influence from a point of high integrity.
The above news will haunt and undermine countless presidents for decades when they encounter the challenges of the future.
@#4 “A legacy of the Cheney administration.”
Now go back and check what US Army officially did, say in WWII. Not even in secret. Ex. participants in Okinawa battle clearly stated in many interviews that not only did they torture almost all captured Japanese for information (about hidden tunnels/caves and other dangers for which they couldn’t wait) but outright kill them after they concluded nothing more can be gained. Have the World and Society went into dark ages after that? No. Did US go and torture random people for fun? No. Did the rest of the World complain about this? No. Because US spoke from position of strength and used outrageous measures as a last resource, when really needed. If they chose “high point of integrity” tens of thousands of those soldiers (and many other people) would be dead.
Also just imagine this type of story published during WWII… Wait, it wouldn’t be. Author and sources would be in for treason. Rightfully so.
It’s no fun torturing a dead person.
Do these detainees have a majority of their limbs? Can they pass the Mini Mental State Exam twice in two weeks?
If yes to either, keep working, you are not done yet.
Information gathered from this so called ‘torture’ is the reason you are alive today to bitch and complain about Bush. If is wasn’t for our brave military, doing what needs to be done, you’d be speaking Iraqian right now. Show some respect.
Was that bad? Should they not have done that? If you really wanted to torture them, they should have read to them from the bible.
Apparently the harder you hit them, the more English you get out of them.
If all the people and their loved ones whose lives were saved from information extracted by torture could all be shepherded together in one spot to become the sole victims of NOT having extracted that information, then I would be against torture to protect myself and those that I am responsible for.
As it is, the people who are presumably OK with dying because critical information wasn’t gleaned in time to stop a terrorist catastrophe, want me and my loved ones to die along with them. I’m not OK with that.
I’m proud of my government for having used every means available to protect me. Even in by doing so they saved a bunch of assholes lives too.
You torture apologists can rant until you’re blue in the face that torturing people saved lives, but you have not one shred of evidence. What’s that? The torturers can’t tell us exactly what it was because it’s too secret. Oh really. How convenient.
I call BS. And now our reputation is in the shitter partly because of torture. Way to go guys.
#12 So wingnuts are OK with the U.S. being lumped in with petty dictatorships. I think we as a nation are better than that. But wingnuts always have been on the bloodthirsty side, so no surprise.
#12 Abuelo… the “it’s been done before so what’s the problem” excuse is getting long in the tooth. You need new material.
Are you ding dongs giving up your usual moral high ground fantasy for good or just putting it on hold?
You’re starting to look like cafeteria Catholics!
#16 Still waiting, pedrito. Still waiting for torture apologists to give us any evidence that torturing people has helped protect us from terrorists.
Still waiting…
Ya know, wingnuts, we made it through the Cold War, the time of greatest peril to the United States, without resorting to torture. Your hero Ronnie signed a treaty banning torture.
And now we have a band of scruffy fanatics hiding in caves in Pakistan who pulled off one big terrorist act, and you wingnuts are ready to throw away your civil liberties and rights and all that makes America great, for the illusion of a little security.
What a bunch of cowardly pussies you wingnuts are.
I have to say, good old American hospitality has really taken a downturn.
Anyone interested in gathering intelligence from war prisoners should read the book “Slow Burn” by Orrin DeForest. He was a CIA supervisor in one of the most violent districts in Vietnam during the war. His methods were effective and didn’t include torture.
ARVN soldiers just beat the piss out prisoners and got nothing. By keeping prisoners isolated from one another and cross checking their information DeForest was able to get proper intel.
His interrogation facilities were more like secured hotels than prisons. Although he was able to pacify the district using intelligence in this way the war was essentially over at that point, so the experiment was moot.
#20 What’s the matter pedrito, afraid to say what you really think? Afraid to say you like torture?
#21 Thank you Chris, that point needs to be made over and over. Torturing to get intel DOESN’T WORK.
Someone please decode Pedro’s rationalization of torture by America by referencing Castro. I think he is implying Castro tortures so it’s ok?
I can’t find a gibberish to English translation on google.
Why torture when you can just splatter a terrorist’s brain all over the battlefield.
No muss, no fuss, no gitmo
OK, you loose the whining from the left, but sacrifices must be made.
I have been tortured. I waited in line at a Division of Motor Vehicles. I’ve had my car slammed in the rear by a car load of Julios with no insurance. I listened to rap music in a rental car for an extended period before I realized it. I have answered the door to Jehovah’s Witness. In every case, I would have preferred to be water boarded or worse yet, have a conversation with Alfred.
I think the CIA did the responsible thing by keeping them alive.
They are saving lives and that’s what matters!