1
   

President OK'ed CIA torture tactics

 
 
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 02:29 am
Quote:
The Bush administration gave the CIA extensive authority to send terrorism suspects to foreign countries for interrogation just days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

The newspaper said President Bush signed a still-classified directive that gave the CIA broad power to operate without case-by-case approval from the White House in the transfer of suspects -- a process known as rendition.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,640 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 02:31 am
http://wwwi.reuters.com/images/w148/amdf884770.jpg
"Heil me! Kill the untermenschen, my white warriors!"
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 02:33 am
Quote:
While renditions were carried out before the Sept. 11 attacks, the CIA has since flown 100 to 150 suspects to countries including Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Pakistan, The Times reported.

A separate report by CBS's "60 Minutes" quoted a former Swedish diplomat who said suspects were stripped, shackled and drugged by masked men before being flown to Egypt, where they were subjected to "electric torture."

'SOMEONE ELSE TO DO YOUR DIRTY WORK'

Michael Scheuer, a former CIA analyst who helped set up the rendition program during the Clinton administration, said officials understood what it meant to send suspects to those countries.

"They don't have the same legal system we have. But we know that going into it," he told CBS. "It's finding someone else to do your dirty work."

Craig Murray, the former British ambassador in Uzbekistan, told CBS that Uzbek citizens, captured in Afghanistan, were flown back to Uzbekistan, where torture techniques include boiling body parts. Tashkent denies it uses systematic torture.

One senior U.S. official told The New York Times that the program had been aimed only at those suspected of knowledge about terrorism operations and were transferred with promises they would not be tortured.
"We get assurances; we check on those assurances, and we double-check on these assurances to make sure that people are being handled properly in respect to human rights," the official said.

He did not dispute there had been mistreatment on some occasions, but said no one died.

The Bush administration has publicly said the United States did not hand over people to be tortured.

"At every step of the way, President Bush and his administration has made very clear that we abide by the laws of our land and the treaty obligations we have," Bartlett told CNN. "We will not torture here in America, and we will not export torture. That is unacceptable to this president, and something that we will not tolerate."
source
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 05:11 am
Surprise surprise.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/06/politics/06intel.html?th&oref=login
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 07:07 am
Where is the evidence to specifically support the title of this thread? And I mean specifically, not a lot of quasi-relevant innuendo.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 03:54 pm
There have been a number of threads citing sources for thr outsourcing of torture by this administration -and, it seems, possibly others.

I do not know that CIA folk have been accused of doing the actual torturing - one assumes the alleged outsourcing is to keep America's hands technically clean?

You however will not believe it until you hear it from an American operative responsible for it, I suspect. So be it - it is natural for you to cjhoose not to believe it - and us to choose to consider it highly likely.

Interestingly - I am wondering if the testimony from actual CIA folk may not soon be forthcoming.

I was reading the other day that CIA staff are facing prosecution for things done under orders - orders which have now been rescinded (eg Bush has, I believe, changed the rules on torture back to where they were?) - the article was suggesting a degree of alienation of staff was resulting.

I will try and find it after work - memory being what it is, I may be misrepresenting the article.

Interestingly, Australian operatives are now being drawn into this - previously our government denied that Australian people were involved in "interrogations" - though they now admit - under duress - they were involved in "questioning".

A former Australian operative (forget his position) is strongly challenging this - after a Mr Habib - a terror suspect recently released from Guantanamo, claimed that Australian staff were present when he was interrogated in Egypt. The government, of course, pooh-poohed this - so the staffer stepped forward to state that Australians HAD been present during interrogations of prisoners He has stopped short of stating that they were present during torture.

I will find sources if I have time after work.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 04:14 pm
The evidence has been pretty much everywhere, Baldimo, if you paid more attention to world events and this corrupt administration.
0 Replies
 
Thomas Hayden
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 04:20 pm
Watch your words. You provide no reliable evidence for the serious acussations you have made. An article in the NYT cannot be considered a good source-specially when matters as torture are concerned-it is one of the most biased American newspapers. I hope they will be intelligent enough to avoid following Dan Rather's way.

About your second post
Quote:
"Heil me! Kill the untermenschen, my white warriors!"


This infamous line tells us many things about you-too many and too bad, indeed. It reveals the totalitarian spirit which lies beneath your liberal "tolerance" which consists of insulting anyone who supports policies or ideas different from yours. You are led by hatred. Can you explain how Bush's policies and fascism are linked?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 04:22 pm
For instance the latest here

Quote:
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said today the United States would never send terrorism suspects to countries where they would be tortured but admitted once they have been dispatched to nations like Saudi Arabia or Egypt the U.S. government has little control.
[...]
Gonzales would not say how many prisoners had been dispatched to other countries but he said in cases such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt which have poor rights records, "additional assurances" of proper treatment were sought.

After that, he admitted, the United States had little control. He also said he could not say whether any prisoners who been sent to other countries have been abused.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 04:59 pm
Hey, word to the wise, they were doing this under the Clinton administration as well.

It is a practice that must stop immediately. What does it gain? Nothing but the pain and suffering of innocent victims accused of egregious acts that they never committed. We also know too well that people who are tortured will say whatever in order to stop the torture.

Of course, Alberto Gonzales would not admit how many prisoners had been dispatched to other countries. That would mean that they WERE sent to countries that have torture.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 06:54 pm
Dookiestix wrote:
The evidence has been pretty much everywhere, Baldimo, if you paid more attention to world events and this corrupt administration.


Watch who you quote there Dook, I haven't even posted on this thread till now.

Dookiestix wrote:
Hey, word to the wise, they were doing this under the Clinton administration as well.


Well this have got to be the first time I have seen someone admit to something Clinton did wrong.

Quote:
It is a practice that must stop immediately. What does it gain?


Why must it stop? It gains information that can be confirmed and or denied easily.

Quote:
We also know too well that people who are tortured will say whatever in order to stop the torture.


Have you heard the reports from people who have conducted these interrogations? They have said that most of these people are hardcore and do not crack. As I mentioned above, I'm sure whatever information is obtained can be confirmed or denied.

Quote:
Nothing but the pain and suffering of innocent victims accused of egregious acts that they never committed.


So you know for a fact that these people are innocent? Can you be sure beyond a reasonable doubt that they are innocent? You do know that people lie about things right? Or do you think only neo-cons lie?

Quote:
Of course, Alberto Gonzales would not admit how many prisoners had been dispatched to other countries. That would mean that they WERE sent to countries that have torture.


Does it mater in the long run? I would think national security is more important then the admission of such things.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 07:00 pm
Interesting essay/article at ForeignPolicy on what should be done to make the CIA more useful.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2782&page=0



Quote:


3 pages. Way to long to post here, but an interesting read.




Quote:
Robert Baer was a CIA case officer from 1976 to 1997. He is the author of See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism (New York: Crown Publishers, 2002)
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 07:10 pm
Quote:
Well this have got to be the first time I have seen someone admit to something Clinton did wrong.


It's called objectivity, Baldimo. But to be fair, the precendence set after 9/11 allowed Gonzales to draft a plan to step up the torturing of innocent victims by SENDING THEM TO OTHER COUNTRIES without trial, without reason whatsoever, period. I'd read up more on the history of this practice before reaching such blind assumptions...

And I meant Brandon, not you in my last post. My apologies...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0203-03.htm

Quote:
Arar, a Canadian citizen born in Syria in 1970, came to Canada in 1987. After earning bachelor's and master's degrees in computer engineering, Arar worked in Ottawa as a telecommunications engineer.

On a stopover in New York as he was returning to Canada from a vacation in Tunisia in September 2002, U.S. officials detained Arar, claiming he had links to al-Qaeda. He was deported to Syria, even though he was carrying a Canadian passport and asked to be returned to that country.

Arar returned to Canada more than a year later, claiming he had been tortured during his incarceration. He accused U.S. officials of sending him to Syria knowing that it practices torture.

U.S. officials have confirmed that "Mr. Arar's name was placed on a terrorist lookout list based on information received from Canada ", and that "the decision to remove Mr. Arar ... was made by U.S. government officials based on our own assessment of the security threat."

Meanwhile, in Mr. Arar's home country, Canada, the case has taken on a high profile. Following extensive media interest, the government reluctantly agreed to a judicial inquiry into the case, which involves the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).

According to the Toronto Globe, there is some suspicion that the government "is attempting to stall the inquiry into irrelevancy by tying it up in lengthy legal proceedings."

"Although the government asked a judge to conduct a public inquiry, it seems determined to retain control over what information will be made public about Mr. Arar, especially as it relates to the activities of the CSIS and the RCMP," the Globe said.

The U.S. State Department has refused to cooperate with the Canadian inquiry.

Arar was transported to Syria under a U.S. government program known as "extreme rendering" -- taking detainees to countries where prison authorities are known to practice torture.

The program has been used extensively by the CIA, which uses leased Gulfstream business jets for its flights. The U.S. government has acknowledged that it engages in "extreme rendering", but insists that countries to which its prisoners are taken provide "diplomatic assurance" that they will be treated humanely.

It is generally thought that the rendering practice may be responsible for some of the "ghost detainees" from Iraq and Afghanistan -- U.S. prisoners whose identities have been hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.


Oh, and if torture is so effective, why has much of the information coming out of Guantanamo been false?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 11:25 pm
Dookiestix wrote:
Quote:
Well this have got to be the first time I have seen someone admit to something Clinton did wrong.


It's called objectivity, Baldimo. But to be fair, the precendence set after 9/11 allowed Gonzales to draft a plan to step up the torturing of innocent victims by SENDING THEM TO OTHER COUNTRIES without trial, without reason whatsoever, period. I'd read up more on the history of this practice before reaching such blind assumptions...

And I meant Brandon, not you in my last post. My apologies...


As I noted above, do you know for an obsolute fact that these people are innocent? You claim they are innocent, but do you know for sure?

Why as non-US citizens should they be allowed to have trials for possible acts of terrorism? If they are suspected then let them be questioned and then released. I'm alomost positive that we just wouldn't grab various people for no reason. There had to be a reason for what happened.

Quote:
Oh, and if torture is so effective, why has much of the information coming out of Guantanamo been false?


How do you know that the information has been false? Do you have any proof of your claims? I do know that 2 years ago they came out and stated that information obtained had stopped and prevented over 100 terrorist attacks. This leads me to beleive that the information wasn't false and was indeed good information.

Terror attacks stopped
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 12:04 am
>sigh< Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 03:09 am
Thomas Hayden wrote:
Watch your words. You provide no reliable evidence for the serious acussations you have made. An article in the NYT cannot be considered a good source-specially when matters as torture are concerned-it is one of the most biased American newspapers. I hope they will be intelligent enough to avoid following Dan Rather's way.

About your second post
Quote:
"Heil me! Kill the untermenschen, my white warriors!"


This infamous line tells us many things about you-too many and too bad, indeed. It reveals the totalitarian spirit which lies beneath your liberal "tolerance" which consists of insulting anyone who supports policies or ideas different from yours. You are led by hatred. Can you explain how Bush's policies and fascism are linked?



What part of 'boiling body parts' don't you understand?

This isn't a rumour, this is as real as Saddam's torture palaces. George W Bush is a frigging pinhead, the fact that you have returned to the happy days of punishing non-Americans for not being.... American for one thing, is proof of just sad the state of 'democracy' is these days.

And my only point is that when we find out that 'grevious bodily harm' has been done illegally, deceptively, with plausible deniability - it's always brown people on the receiving end isn't it? And strong white men in uniforms handing it out......
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 04:00 am
Um - well, no.

The outsourced torture is presumably done by brown men.

And non-white people do quite a lot of torturing of each other, sadly.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 07:42 am
Mr Stillwater wrote:
What part of 'boiling body parts' don't you understand?

This isn't a rumour, this is as real as Saddam's torture palaces.......

The part where you accuse the president of approving it.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 10:05 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
Mr Stillwater wrote:
What part of 'boiling body parts' don't you understand?

This isn't a rumour, this is as real as Saddam's torture palaces.......

The part where you accuse the president of approving it.


Well, I haven't seen him vociferously speak out against torture, either. He's been too busy trying to destroy SS.
0 Replies
 
smog
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 10:29 am
Haven't American presidents been doing this for decades? I'm not really surprised by this.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » President OK'ed CIA torture tactics
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 07:04:08