CIA Torture Manual

Like I said, I have no doubt that there are rapists in the US Air Force. I have no doubt that some of them are high ranking officiers. In fact, based on my experience with graduates of the Air Force Academy, there’s a highly misogenous atmosphere there. But I doubt that there’s a policy actively trained into soldiers that advocates rape as a method of obtaining information.

There are enough bad things you can say about the US military without having having to make things up. This is rapidly becoming one of those arguments that our friends TC and CS could look at in confirmation of the belief that those who oppose the war in Iraq really just don’t like soldiers.

[quote]This is rapidly becoming one of those arguments that our friends TC and CS could look at in confirmation of the belief that those who oppose the war in Iraq really just don’t like soldiers.[/quote] Yes, and the reason why I’m opposed to cutting trees is because I really dislike lumberjacks.

bobepine

[quote=“TheGingerMan”]In fact, as an army brat, and former member of an artillery regiment (mock all you want, we’re still the best friend of a hard-pressed infantry), this thread (and many others) exhibits a quite shocking ignorance of military means and ways.

In many ways, “civilians” don’t get it at all…[/quote]
Both statements are true. Most people I

[quote=“TheGingerMan”]In fact, as an army brat, and former member of an artillery regiment (mock all you want, we’re still the best friend of a hard-pressed infantry), [b]this thread (and many others) exhibits a quite shocking ignorance of military means and ways.

In many ways, “civilians” don’t get it at all[/b]… :taz:[/quote]
Hey Gingerman, I’m all ears. I don’t pretend to have an understanding of military means and ways - I only have an opinion about torture - I think it’s immoral and I think it probably does not yield much truthful and therefore useful information. You sound like you have some knowledge of military ways - why don’t you share in a little more detail why this thread is ignorant. I’d like to learn. Maybe you can change my mind (I have my doubts, however).

Preferably you can share it in another thread - because this one deals with the CIA and it’s use of torture.

Bodo

This is as far fetched as the idea that the AF academy actually has a policy about raping to get info. There are plenty of folks who support the troops, but have reservations or who opposed the war in Iraq. Stick to the topic - which is really about the CIA torture manual.

Bodo

[quote=“Bodo”][quote=“TheGingerMan”]In fact, as an army brat, and former member of an artillery regiment (mock all you want, we’re still the best friend of a hard-pressed infantry), [b]this thread (and many others) exhibits a quite shocking ignorance of military means and ways.

In many ways, “civilians” don’t get it at all[/b]… :taz:[/quote]
Hey Gingerman, I’m all ears. I don’t pretend to have an understanding of military means and ways - I only have an opinion about torture - I think it’s immoral and I think it probably does not yield much truthful and therefore useful information. You sound like you have some knowledge of military ways - why don’t you share in a little more detail why this thread is ignorant. I’d like to learn. Maybe you can change my mind (I have my doubts, however).

Preferably you can share it in another thread - because this one deals with the CIA and it’s use of torture.

Bodo[/quote]

Sorry, Bodo. My original venom was laced in the General Direction of the Great Supposers. And you’re right: this thread is about CIA Torture, though it was in that general descent into the Air Force rape incidents that brought my Gander Up.

And please Don’t Misquote me. I never said this thread (and others) IS (are) ignorant of military life in general, only that it (they) EXHIBIT the same. The former suggests that it’s all bunk, I only maintain than some of it is.

Torture is Immoral. I agree. I myself am opposed to it. But first what is Torture? Is it a blanket statement or are there different levels of acceptability, according to the “relevant” needs? Physical, Mental, Emotional, PsyOPs, subliminal propaganda, the list goes on and on.

And, fear not, one deep dark day, when I’ve crawled out of the GingerCavern long enuff for the sun to boil my brain, then I promise I’ll get into that new thread about how most civilians are ungrateful pedantic wankers…

Awright, then :cookie:

Excellent post there seeker4. Namahottie, since you began this offshoot would you care to comment.

I have only one objection to what you wrote:

With respect to recent torture scandals in Iraq and Afghanistan, punishments have often been extremely lenient even for those responsible for the death of prisoners under their control. In addition, torture under the Bush administration has not only been tolerated, but even encouraged. These are not idle speculations but provable points that follow from the first torture memos, through the enhanced interrogation techniques approved by Rumsfeld which included waterboarding (which cannot be considered anything but sever torture), to the spread of these tactics to Iraq by General Miller. According to the army’s and Pentagons own reports, Miller was sent to Gitmoize (Guantanamo-ize) Abu Ghraib. What resulted from that we have all seen. We have also heard in the last year the growing reports from credible soldiers that abuse and torture is widespread and that they were being ordered by superiors to engage in it.

The final nail in the coffin so to speak was the administration’s threat to veto the McCain Ban on Torture (which would have been Bush’s first use of the veto) and the enventual signing of it with a presidential interpretation - which essentially allows the president to overrule the torture ban in his execution of the war on terror. Whatever may have been the military’s previous practices and thoughts on torture in the past, they have changed since Bush came to power.

[quote=“Muzha Man”]Excellent post there seeker4. Namahottie, since you began this offshoot would you care to comment.

I have only one objection to what you wrote:

I didn’t write that above. I’m not that smart!!! :wink: Comment about what. Okay so the story that was given to me was flawed and corrected by those who truly (seeker4) have experience with the Military. The closest I’ve come to it was my father, who was in the Air Force, but we’ve never talked about his entire experience there. :idunno:

So what do you really want me to respond to?

It wasn’t a challenge. I was just curious if what s4 had written has affected your thoughts in any way.

[quote=“TainanCowboy”]LOL…and the enemy really is glad to have your support.

All Your Bases Belong to US.[/quote]

Surely you don’t advocate torture?

[quote=“gao_bo_han”][quote=“TainanCowboy”]LOL…and the enemy really is glad to have your support.

All Your Bases Belong to US.[/quote]

Surely you don’t advocate torture?[/quote]

Hypothetical situation.

What is the U.S. government had a person whom has knowlegdege about a potential nuclear strike against the U.S.

The person won’t speak.

This attack could possible kill 100’s of thousands of people.

I say torture the christ/mohammad etc. out of them.

Understood. Here’s another example:

The US government has somebody in custody who they think has knowledge of an imminent nuclear strike against the United States. They torture him for hours on end, but he just keeps saying he doesn’t know what they’re talking about. But they think they’ve got the right man so they keep torturing him for days. He begs for mercy. He begs for death. They bring in some government doctors to keep him alive for more torturing. Then oops, turns out they had the wrong guy. The attack never happens, or maybe it does happen. Either way, he didn’t know about it.

How will the torture statute be phrased? Will it allow for reasonable mistakes? In the above example, would the man’s tormentors be exonerated?

Let’s try another example:

The US government has somebody in custody who they think has knowledge of a possible WMD attack sometime within the next few months. Not an imminent attack, but an attack nevertheless. Can he be tortured? Should the officials have to wait until they believe the attack is imminent to torture him? What if the attack is six months off? A year?

There is so much potential for abuse with any kind of legalized torture. I’m a patriotic American, and I’m proud of the values my country stands for. Torture and cruelty are not among those values. The Senate apparently thinks so too, because they voted 90 to 9 in favor a bill that bans torture in all circumstances.

Great post! :bravo: :notworthy: :bravo:
Bodo

Or how about this one?

US soldiers desperate for information to tell their superiors and generally frustrated about slow progress kidnapp without cause the relative of a known insugency member. They send him to a prison where torture is widely practiced, and, of course, he is tortured.

Or how about this one. A German citizen is mistakenly identified as having links to terrorist organizations. He is illegally kidnapped by the CIA, transported to Afghanistan, where he is held without warrent for almost half a year. During this time, he is drugged and beaten.

Opps, these are real.
aclu.org/natsec/emergpowers/ … 51206.html

While the Zen thought experiments make the problem of torture ohhhh so difficult, the reality is much more mundane.

[quote=“gao_bo_han”][quote=“TainanCowboy”]LOL…and the enemy really is glad to have your support.
All Your Bases Belong to US.[/quote]
Surely you don’t advocate torture?[/quote]gao_bo_han -
“Are you still having sex with chickens?”…:sunglasses:

Gao, no. I do not advocate torture. I have posted my thoughts on this subject in a few other threads here on Forumosa.com.
It rarely accomplished its desired intent, its messy, it is in blantant violation of the rules of warfare and gives your opponenets just that much more to finger-point and bitch about. Torture also has long term negative effects on those who do it as well. Overall it has more minuses than pluses.
A skilled interogator understands the ‘honey vs vinegar’ scenario in building a longer relationship with the prisoner and the greater value of information that is obtained in this manner. It has a proven track record. However, timely information is usually imperative in a battlefield situation - “Are there IED’s on this road?” “Where is Muktar Cameldung staying tonight?” These are the issues faced all too often in combat. No time for the longer establishing relationship method. Its a tuff call.
And throwing in the wildcard of ‘religious’ zealot horndogs who hae spent their last 365 nights dreaming of those promised 72 virgins while smelling their comrades stinkin’ ass just makes the info extraction procedure even more complicated. Death is not their greatest concern - or so they would have you believe.

I have no answers. I have also seen too much of the results of the use of torture on innocents. Its no good.
But also - lets be more clear about what is torture and what is just mis-treatment. The vast, overwhelming amount of incidents at Abu Ghraib was NOT torture. It was stupid mis-treatment. There were 2 or 3 incidents where prisoners were killed - but they were murdering terrs to begin with. I have little sympathy. The rest, as shown in the pic’s was not torture. This is my opinion.

As for the “CIA Torture Manual” thing. I thought this was cleared up back in the mid-80’s. It was a comic book. Get over it. :smiley:

Tainan Cowboy,

If you are opposed to torture, then why did you tell Bodo the enemy appreciates his support when all he said was that he doesn’t want his tax dollars financing torture? I don’t understand your position here.

[quote=“Muzha Man”]Excellent post there seeker4.

I have only one objection to what you wrote:

With respect to recent torture scandals in Iraq and Afghanistan, punishments have often been extremely lenient even for those responsible for the death of prisoners under their control. In addition, torture under the Bush administration has not only been tolerated, but even encouraged. These are not idle speculations but provable points that follow from the first torture memos, through the enhanced interrogation techniques approved by Rumsfeld which included waterboarding (which cannot be considered anything but sever torture), to the spread of these tactics to Iraq by General Miller. According to the army’s and Pentagons own reports, Miller was sent to Gitmoize (Guantanamo-ize) Abu Ghraib. What resulted from that we have all seen. We have also heard in the last year the growing reports from credible soldiers that abuse and torture is widespread and that they were being ordered by superiors to engage in it.

The final nail in the coffin so to speak was the administration’s threat to veto the McCain Ban on Torture (which would have been Bush’s first use of the veto) and the eventual signing of it with a presidential interpretation - which essentially allows the president to overrule the torture ban in his execution of the war on terror. Whatever may have been the military’s previous practices and thoughts on torture in the past, they have changed since Bush came to power.[/quote]
This thread has become multi-subject, despite the title. No big deal. As Forrest Gump said,

On the topic of torture, anyone interested in the issue has to read this article from the New Yorker. Read also the memo from a former general counsel to the Navy who tried to stop the Bush admin from legalizing torture.

Summary of both:

article:
newyorker.com/fact/content/a … 227fa_fact

memo:
newyorker.com/images/pdfs/moramemo.pdf

[quote=“Muzha Man”]On the topic of torture, anyone interested in the issue has to read this article from the New Yorker. Read also the memo from a former general counsel to the Navy who tried to stop the Bush admin from legalizing torture.

article:
newyorker.com/fact/content/a … 227fa_fact

memo:
newyorker.com/images/pdfs/moramemo.pdf[/quote]

Thanks for the articles. Very interesting. Very disturbing.

Bodo

[quote]Military interrogators posing as FBI agents at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, wrapped terrorism suspects in an Israeli flag and forced them to watch homosexual pornography under strobe lights during interrogation sessions that lasted as long as 18 hours, according to one of a batch of FBI memos released Thursday.

FBI agents working at the prison complained about the military interrogators’ techniques in e-mails to their superiors from 2002 to 2004, 54 e-mails released by the American Civil Liberties Union showed. The agents tried to get the military interrogators to follow a less coercive approach and warned that the harsh methods could hinder future criminal prosecutions of terrorists because information gained illegally is inadmissible in court.

Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, who was in charge of the prison at the time, overrode the FBI agents’ protests, according to the documents.

The memos offer some of the clearest proof yet that the abuses and torture of prisoners in U.S. military custody weren’t the isolated actions of low-ranking soldiers but a result of policies approved by senior officials, the ACLU said.
[/quote]
realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13945827.htm

Ummm… where do they get these ideas?.. don’t ask, don’t tell…