~ Shrinks and The SERE Technique At Guantanamo ~

[Zman]

/Peace To All

Note: I would appreciate if the mods approved this at their earliest convenience :thumbs_up

Shrinks and The SERE Technique At Guantanamo

By Stephen Soldz
05/29/07
InformationClearingHouse

The Defense Department (DoD) has just declassified a report from their Inspector General (OIG) looking at the various investigations that the Department has conducted into repeated claims of detainee abuse--a.k.a. "torture" and "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment"--banned by international and United States law.

The report documents that the various DoD "investigations were, individually and in total, inadequate:

Allegations of detainee abuse were not consistently reported, investigated, or managed in an effective, systematic, and timely manner. Multiple reporting channels were available for reporting allegations and, once reported, command discretion could be used in determining the action to be taken on the reported allegation. We did not identify any specific allegations that were not reported or reported and not investigated. Nevertheless, no single entity within any level of command was aware of the scope and breadth of detainee abuse.

SERE

Perhaps the most important information in this report, however, is that it provides further documentation that psychologists were central to the development of the abusive interrogation paradigm developed at Guantanamo and migrated to Abu Ghraib and other Iraqi prisons. In particular, the OIG provides concrete evidence that techniques developed in the US military's SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape) program to help US troops at high risk of becoming POWs evade capture and resist breaking under abusive interrogations were systematically imported to Guantanamo and, less systematically, to Iraq and Afghanistan.

As the report describes:

"DoD SERE training, sometimes referred to as code of conduct training, prepares select military personnel with survival and evasion techniques in case they are isolated from friendly forces. The schools also teach resistance techniques that are designed to provide U.S. military members, who may be captured or detained, with the physical and mental tools to survive a hostile interrogation and deny the enemy the information they wish to obtain. SERE training incorporates physical and psychological pressures, which act as counterresistance techniques, to replicate harsh conditions that the Service member might encounter if they are held by forces that do not abide by the Geneva Conventions." (p. 23)

As part of the SERE program, trainees are subjected to abuse, including sleep deprivation, sexual and cultural humiliation, and, in some instances, waterboarding, described by one SERE graduate thus:

"[Y]ou are strapped to a board, a washcloth or other article covers your face, and water is continuously poured, depriving you of air, and suffocating you until it is removed, and/or inducing you to ingest water. We were carefully monitored (although how they determined these limits is beyond me), but it was a most unpleasant experience, and its threat alone was sufficient to induce compliance, unless one was so deprived of water that it would be an unintentional means to nourishment.

Former Air Force officer and now psychoanalyst Eric Anders described his SERE training experience thusly:

"I remember a variety of sadistic abuses, often in the form of mind games and humiliation. It was a horrible experience, but I imagine it might have prepared me to be in the position some of the Iraqi prisoners have unfortunately found themselves in."

Central to SERE is the role of psychologists. A psychologist is required to be present during certain aspects of the process, such as waterboarding as a "safety officer," to stop the training if (s)he perceives the trainee is being overly-traumatized.

In 2005, the New Yorker's Jane Mayer reported evidence that interrogators at Guantanamo were being trained in SERE techniques; they were "reverse engineering" the resistance techniques in order to figure out how to break down detainees. While Mayer reported suspicions, direct evidence of SERE involvement at Guantanamo was lacking for another year, till, in July 2006 Salon's Mark Benjamin, in Torture Teachers reported documentary evidence that SERE was, indeed, taught at Guantanamo.

In addition to documentary evidence that SERE techniques were taught at Guantanamo, Benjamin pointed out the similarities between what is done to US troops during SERE training and what was done to US detainees:

"There are striking similarities between the reported detainee abuse at both Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib and the techniques used on soldiers going through SERE school, including forced nudity, stress positions, isolation, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation and exhaustion from exercise."

Michael Otterman, in his marvelous and very disturbing new book, American Torture, put together then extant evidence of SERE reverse-engineering. Though the use of SERE techniques at US detention facilities was hardly in doubt after the reporting of Mayer, Benjamin, and Otterman , it was not clear until the OIG report whether the use of the techniques was intentional or inadvertent, a result of widespread exposure to them by US personnel during training.

The new OIG report resolves this question, containing as it does official admissions that SERE was, indeed systematically taught at Guantanamo and in Iraq.

"Counterresistance techniques taught by the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency [the agency responsible for SERE training] contributed to the development of interrogation policy at the U.S. Southern Command. According to interviewees, at some point in 2002, the U.S. Southern Command began to question the effectiveness of the Joint Task Force 170 (JTF-170), the organization at Guantanamo that was responsible for collecting intelligence from a group of hard core al Qaeda and Taliban detainees.

Counterresistance techniques were introduced because personnel believed that interrogation methods used were no longer effective in obtaining useful information from some detainees. On June 17, 2002, the Acting Commander, Southern Command requested that the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) provide his command with an external review of ongoing detainee intelligence collection operations at Guantanamo Bay, which included an examination of information and psychological operations plans.

The CJCS review recommended that the Federal Bureau of Investigation Behavioral Science Unit, the Army's Behavioral Science Consultation Team, the Southern Command Psychological Operations Support Element, and the JTF-170 clinical psychologist develop a plan to exploit detainee vulnerabilities. The Commander, JTF-170 expanded on the CJCS recommendations and decided to also consider SERE training techniques and other external interrogation methodologies as possible DoD interrogation alternatives" (pp. 24-25).

As a result of this review, SERE was introduced at Guantanamo. Notice that psychologists were key to this process:

"On September 16, 2002, the Army Special Operations Command and the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency co-hosted a SERE psychologist conference at Fort Bragg for JTF-170 [the military component responsible for interrogations at Guantanamo] interrogation personnel. The Army's Behavioral Science Consultation Team from Guantanamo Bay also attended the conference. Joint Personnel Recovery Agency personnel briefed JTF-170 representatives on the exploitation techniques and methods used in resistance (to interrogation) training at SERE schools.

The JTF-170 personnel understood that they were to become familiar with SERE training and be capable of determining which SERE information and techniques might be useful in interrogations at Guantanamo. Guantanamo Behavioral Science Consultation Team personnel understood that they were to review documentation and standard operating procedures for SERE training in developing the standard operating procedure for the JTF-170, if the command approved those practices. The Army Special Operations Command was examining the role of interrogation support as a " Sere Psychologist competency area" (p. 25, emphasis added.)

For those of opposed to the participation of psychologists in abusive interrogations, this document contains the first definitive proof that the Behavioral Science Consultation Teams (BSCTs), consisting at that point of psychologists and psychiatrists (later, the military announced that they preferred psychologists for this role), were deliberately trained in abusive SERE techniques.

According to the OIG report, SERE psychologists were apparently not directly involved in individual interrogations. Rather, their role was to train those conducting or supervising the interrogations:

"On September 24, 2002, a Joint Personnel Recovery Agency representative at the SERE conference recommended in a conference memorandum report to his Commander that their organization "not get directly involved in actual operations." Specifically, the memorandum states that the agency had "no actual experience in real world prisoner handling," developed concepts based "on our past enemies," and assumes that "procedures we use to exploit our personnel will be effective against the current detainees." In a later interview, the Commander, Joint Personnel Recovery Agency stated that his agency's support to train and teach "was so common that he probably got 15 similar reports [memoranda] a week" (p. 25).

Indeed, the report documents that SERE instructors went to Guantanamo and provided training:

"On at least two occasions, the JTF-170 requested that Joint Personnel Recovery Agency instructors be sent to Guantanamo to instruct interrogators in SERE counterresistance interrogation techniques. SERE instructors from Fort Bragg responded to Guantanamo requests for instructors trained in the use of SERE interrogation resistance techniques" (p. 26).

These efforts led to a October 11, 2002 memorandum and legal brief requesting approval of a selection of these SERE techniques. This request led to December 2, 2002 approval of many of these SERE-based techniques by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld

All evidence is that these SERE techniques continued to be used, with active participation of the BST psychologists. For example, it is well documented (see the interrogation log) that the chair of the Guantanamo BSCT team, psychologist Major John Leso participated in the abusive interrogation (a.k.a. torture) of prisoner 063, Mohammed al-Qahtani.

A July 14, 2004 memo from the FBI to the Army Criminal Investigation Command documents the effects of this interrogation on al-Qatani:

"In September or October of 2002 FBI agents observed that a canine was used in an aggressive manner to intimidate detainee __ after he had been subjected to intense isolation for over three months. During that time period, __ was totally isolated (with the exception of occasional interrogations) in a cell that was always flooded with light. By late November, the detainee was evidencing behavior consistent with extreme psychological trauma (talking to non-existent people, reporting hearing voices, crouching in the corner of a cell covered with a sheet for hours on end). It is unknown to the FBI whether such extended isolation was approved by DoD authorities."

SERE In Iraq and Afghanistan

According to the report, these SERE techniques "migrated" to Afghanistan and Iraq:

"Counterresistance interrogation techniques in the U.S. Central Command Area of Operation derived from multiple sources that included migration of documents and personnel, the JTF-Guantanamo Assessment Team, and the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency" (p. 26, emphasis added).

The report also provides direct evidence that SERE techniques were deliberately brought to Iraq.

"The Joint Personnel Recovery Agency was also responsible for the migration of counterresistance interrogation techniques into the U.S. Central Command's area of responsibility. In September 2003, at the request of the Commander, TF-20, the Commander, Joint Personnel Recovery Agency sent an interrogation assessment team to Iraq to provide advice and assistance to the task force interrogation mission. The TF-20 was the special mission unit that operated in the CJTF-7 area of operations" (p. 28).

In fact, TF-20 was a 40-person special forces unit, with its own "private aviation unit" tasked with capturing or killing former Iraqi Baath leadership and resistance leaders ("high value targets"). TF-20 was accused of being "trigger happy," leading to innocent civilian deaths. Those captured by TF-20 were, according to the OIG report, subject to SERE techniques.

In Iraq it also appears that SERE staff got to participate directly in interrogations:

"The Commander, Joint Personnel Recovery Agency, explained that he understood that the detainees held by TF-20 were determined to be Designated Unlawful Combatants (DUCs), not Enemy Prisoners of War (EPW) protected by the Geneva Convention and that the interrogation techniques were authorized and that the JPRA team members were not to exceed the standards used in SERE training on our own Service members. He also confirmed that the U.S. Joint Forces Command J-3 and the Commanding Officer, TF-20 gave a verbal approval for the SERE team to actively participate in "one or two demonstration" interrogations" (p. 28).

It appears that TF-20 were so brutal in their application of SERE techniques that there was disagreement between SERE and TF-20 staff regarding the appropriateness of using the SERE-based techniques:

"SERE team members and TF-20 staff disagreed about whether SERE techniques were in compliance with the Geneva Conventions. When it became apparent that friction was developing, the decision was made to pull the team out before more damage was done to the relationship between the two organizations. The SERE team members prepared After Action Reports that detailed the confusion and allegations of abuse that took place during the deployment" (p. 28).

American Psychological Association Rresponse

With the release of the OIG's report, it is now irrefutable that both SERE psychologists and Guantanamo BSCT psychologists were involved in the development of these forms of interrogation abuse, forms of interrogation that clearly constitute psychological torture and were illegal under the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and various US laws until the 2006 Military Commissions Act granted immunity to those who had previously broken these laws during the "Global War On Terror."

Since psychologists became aware that their profession was being utilized to teach and conduct abusive interrogations, there has been a movement among them to ban participation in abusive interrogations. In response, the American Psychological Association (APA), the main psychologist professional organizations adopted a resolution condemning torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and forbidding members to participate in abusive treatment.

However, like the Bush administration, the APA is always against torture and abusive treatment but never actually sees it. Thus, the APA has never expressed concern as reports have come flooding out suggesting that abuse treatment (whether formally "torture" or merely "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment") is common in US detention facilities holding so-called enemy combatants. Neither has the APA expressed concern at the repeated reports of psychologist participation in abusive interrogations. Rather, they have attacked the critics of psychologist abuse. In a statement that he probably now regrets for making so obvious his contempt for those shedding light on psychologists' role in abusive interrogations, the 2006 APA President, Gerald Koocher, wrote: "A number of opportunistic commentators masquerading as scholars have continued to report on alleged abuses by mental health professionals."

However, the APA, like other health provider professional organizations felt the heat as these reports escalated. Thus, in June 2005 they convened a Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS), clearly designed to provide a rubber stamp on the participation of psychologists in national security interrogations.

After 2_ days of deliberations this Task Force concluded:

"It is consistent with the APA Code of Ethics for psychologists to serve in consultative roles to interrogation- or information-gathering processes for national security-related purposes. While engaging in such consultative and advisory roles entails a delicate balance of ethical considerations, doing so puts psychologists in a unique position to assist in ensuring that such processes are safe and ethical for all participants."

Of course, the value of a Task Force report depends upon the composition and expertise of the membership of that Task Force. So who did the APA see fit to include on its Task Force?

Strangely, when the report was released, it did not include a list of members; its authorship was, rather, anonymous. When members asked who was on the task Force, they were told the membership was confidential. (For the record it should be noted that the PENS membership, while kept from the public and the broader Association membership, was, in fact, released to the APAs Council of Representatives) When, a year later, the membership was finally published by Mark Benjamin in Salon, it was revealed that six of nine voting members were from the military and intelligence agencies with direct connections to interrogations at Guantanamo and elsewhere; the conclusion of the task Force's deliberations was obviously foregone.

Especially relevant, given the revelations in this newly-released OIG, at least two of the members of this Task Force had direct SERE connections. Captain Bryce E. Lefeve had served at the Navy SERE school from 1990 to 1993 before joining the special forces and becoming the "Joint Special Forces Task Force psychologist to Afghanistan in 2002, where he lectured to interrogators and was consulted on various interrogation techniques." (Criously,, he has "lectured on Brainwashing: The Method of Forceful Interrogation".)

But perhaps most disturbingly, on the task force was Colonel Morgan Banks. His biography states that "[h]e is the senior Army Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) Psychologist, responsible for the training and oversight of all Army SERE Psychologists, who include those involved in SERE training. He provides technical support and consultation to all Army psychologists providing interrogation support. His initial duty assignment as a psychologist was to assist in establishing the Army's first permanent SERE training program involving a simulated captivity experience."

Given what the OIG's report reveals about the central role of SERE in the development of US abusive interrogation techniques, as well as revelations regarding other PENS members, it appears ever more likely that the APA appointed some of this country's top torturers to formulate its policy on participation in abusive interrogations. The PENS report lacks any credibility. If the APA maintained a shred of decency, they would take the opportunity provided by the release of the OIG report to admit that they made a mistake in creating the PENS Task Force and would immediately set aside the PENS report and begin a new open discussion of the facts and the ethics involved in participation in national security interrogations.

In addition, if the APA were really concerned about ethics and decency, they would join the call by Physicians for Human Rights and by bioethicist Steven Miles for an independent Congressional (or Congressional sponsored) investigation into detainee abuse and the role of psychologists and other health professionals in that abuse.

For only a full investigation can clear up the question of exactly what types of abuse went on in the US detention facilities and exactly what role did psychologists and other health professionals play in these abuses.

If, as the APA repetitively states as if a mantra, its policies are based upon "our belief that having psychologists consult with interrogation teams makes an important contribution toward keeping interrogations safe and ethical," then the APA would surely want an investigation to reveal any abuses that occurred so as to help prevent future abuses. Of course, if, despite the mountains of evidence, psychologists truly are innocent of involvement in detainee abuse, only a full investigation could clear the air.

Unfortunately, I don't expect the APA to set aside the PENS report nor to endorse an independent investigation of detainee abuse. All evidence is that, from the beginning, APA actions have had one goal in mind, to maintain psychologist involvement in interrogations at all cost. After 9/11, the APA sought to show the government that psychologists were key players in "homeland security" [see Making psychological research a priority for countering terrorism]. To eschew involvement, abuse or not, would be to forsake the access and influence for which they have fought so hard.

Stephen Soldz is psychoanalyst, psychologist, public health researcher, and faculty member at the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis. He maintains the Psychoanalysts for Peace and Justice web site and the Psyche, Science, and Society blog.

Source:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17790.htm

 

[Zman]

/Peace To All

First off, I'd like to thank the mods for their speedy approval of this post.

Post-9/11 Renditions: An Extraordinary Violation of International Law

Some Say Lack Of Due Process In Kidnappings and Detention At Secret Prisons Amounts To War Crimes

By Michael Bilton
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists
Posted: 5/22/2007
PublicIntegrity

PORTSMOUTH, England — A plane lands in darkness and is directed to a far corner of an airfield, well out of public view. A group of men described as "masked ninjas" — wearing black overalls and hoods with slits for their eyes, nose and mouth — descend the aircraft steps and make their way to a nearby airport building. Inside a small room the detainee is waiting under armed guard, perhaps already blindfolded. He is immediately hooded as a process known as a "twenty-minute takeout" begins. Soon he is aboard the plane, on his way to another country to be harshly interrogated and possibly tortured.

That is what happened to two Egyptian asylum seekers in Sweden on December 18, 2001, and to numerous other terrorist suspects since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Events like this rarely happened before 9/11, but many sources claim that the CIA began frequent use of the practice almost immediately afterward. Now its pattern is familiar and so is its odd name: "extraordinary rendition."

The United States has never acknowledged such renditions, but the CIA's activities have been extensively studied and documented by European and other governments, as well as organizations that monitor human rights violations. One such inquiry, by Sweden's parliamentary ombudsman, was set in motion when the Egyptian asylum seekers were swept away — and Sweden landed in hot water with the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Extraordinary rendition may be a new term, but it is not a new practice — the English did it in the 17th century, shipping prisoners to Scotland to be tortured. Secret prisons are not a recent invention either. Britain ran such a camp holding Nazi prisoners at Bad Nenndorf, Germany, after World War II.

Evidence of ill treatment there was kept secret for 60 years. America also had a secret postwar camp known only as "P.O. Box 1142" at Fort Hunt next to the Potomac River in Virginia just outside of Washington, D.C. There, former U.S. interrogators have now disclosed, more than 3,400 Nazi prisoners were kept "off the books" in violation of the Geneva Conventions while they were interrogated about vital technical intelligence that could be useful to America.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the United States captured terrorist suspects overseas and "rendered" them back to the U.S. or to a third country to face trial. The CIA's extraordinary renditions reported to have occurred after 9/11 are quite different. What makes them extraordinary is that there is no judicial proceeding or due process of law; after the kidnapping, terrorist suspects simply disappear into a system of secret prisons for long-term detention and interrogation, sometimes accompanied by torture.
Human rights advocates and some legal scholars argue that extraordinary renditions are violations of international law, with some characterizing them as war crimes.

For example, Professor Jordan J. Paust of the University of Houston, a former U.S. Army lawyer who is an expert on international law, has presented a formal analysis asserting that U.S. government leaders and those who planned or took part in extraordinary renditions could be prosecuted for committing war crimes.

The program began after the 9/11 attacks; within a week, President Bush signed a classified presidential "finding" authorizing an unprecedented range of covert operations, including capturing terrorists in foreign nations and what the Washington Post characterized as "the expenditure of vast funds to coax foreign intelligence services into a new era of cooperation with the CIA." A portent of what was about to be unleashed came when Vice President Cheney said on NBC's "Meet the Press," "We also have to work, though, sort of the dark side, if you will.

We've got to spend time in the shadows of the intelligence world. A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion."

Foreign intelligence services — including those inside the European Union — worked closely with their CIA counterparts in hunting those suspected of planning the 9/11 attacks or being al Qaeda members. According to journalist Stephen Grey's respected chronology of known renditions before and after 9/11, terrorist suspects were being picked up under the new programs within weeks of the planes crashing in New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Reports indicate that these men were tracked down, handed over to CIA special operations teams and then flown to secret detention centers where harsh techniques were used in their interrogation.
This article examines three thoroughly documented extraordinary renditions.

Sweden Criticized By U.N. Panel

Soon after 9/11, Swedish security police lodged objections to applications for asylum from two Egyptians, Ahmed Agiza and Mohammed El Zari. Even before the Swedish government officially decided to return them to Egypt, a report by the Swedish ombudsman relates that the CIA offered use of an aircraft so the men could be expelled the moment a formal order was issued.

According to this report — which was based in large part on interviews with and documentation provided by Swedish security officials — at midday on December 18, 2001, CIA officials told their Swedish counterparts there would be no room on the plane for the Swedish security police.
When the Swedes objected, the CIA relented but insisted that a security check would have to be conducted on the two detainees at Bromma Airport near Stockholm. That being Swedish territory, the Swedes believed they were in charge of the deportation of two men from their country. It did not turn out that way.

A few hours after the expulsion order was official, the men were arrested. They arrived at Bromma about 8:30 p.m. Swedish counterterrorism officers and CIA officials were present, along with the security police.

"Just before 9 p.m. the American plane touched down," according to the ombudsman's report, "Officer Y went to speak to the occupants of the plane. These included, in addition to its crew, a security team of seven or eight, among them a doctor and two Egyptian officials. Officer Y informed the American officials that A. [Agiza] and E.Z. [El Zari] were waiting in the vehicles parked in front of the police station [at Bromma Airport] and the Americans were taken to them.

"The security team, all of whom were disguised by hoods around their heads, then went up to the vehicles in which A. and E.Z. were sitting. One of the men was taken first to the police station by the team. Inside the station, in a small changing room, the American officials conducted what they had referred to as a security check.

"According to reports, a doctor was present in the changing room. When the check had been completed, the second man was sent for and the same procedure repeated.

"The inquiry has revealed that this security check comprised at least the following. A. and E.Z. were subjected to a body search, their clothes were cut to pieces and placed in bags, their hair was thoroughly examined, as were their oral cavities and ears. In addition they were handcuffed and their ankles fettered, each was then dressed in an overall and photographed. Finally loose hoods without holes for their eyes were placed over their heads. A. and E.Z. were then taken out of the police station in bare feet and led to the aircraft.

"In addition, K.J. lawyer has reported that E.Z. said that the security team had forced him to lean forwards in the changing room and he had then felt some object being inserted into his anal cavity. Afterwards he was equipped with a diaper. According to K.J., E.Z. then felt calmer, as if 'all the muscles in his body were slack.' E.Z. was, however, fully conscious for the entire journey.

K.J. has added that E.Z. was blindfolded and placed in a hood and also forced to lie in an uncomfortable position on board the aircraft. …

"According to … witnesses, the security team conducted the security inspection rapidly, efficiently and professionally. The members of the team did not speak to each other but communicated using hand signals. …"

A Council of Europe inquiry obtained data from Eurocontrol, the European air traffic control agency, showing that the aircraft involved was a Gulfstream 5 executive jet with the call sign N379P, owned by Premier Executive Transport Services. The plane had set out on a prearranged two-day trip from the United States to board the two detainees in Sweden, take them to Egypt and then return to the U.S. after a brief refueling stop in Scotland.

This Eurocontrol data indicated that the executive jet that day covered many thousands of miles. It took off from Dulles International Airport during the early hours of December 18, flew direct to Cairo and collected two Egyptian officials; after refueling, it immediately headed for Sweden. The plane was on the ground at Bromma for just 65 minutes before heading back to Egypt.

According to the Swedish ombudsman's report: "Just two representatives of the Security Police were on board the plane: officer Y and the civilian interpreter. The original intention had been for three people to accompany the plane to Egypt but late in the day they were informed by the captain of the plane that there was only room for two from the Swedish Security Police. A. and E.Z. were placed at the rear of the plane, each lying on a mattress to which they were strapped. Their handcuffs, ankle fetters and hoods were not removed during the flight to Egypt.

"The transport log drawn up by officer Y contains the following entry: 'They were kept under observation for the entire time and the guards were changed every other hour. The doctor in the escort inspected them all the time. … [T]he body-search at the airport and the use of handcuffs and fetters was at the express order of the captain of the aircraft. In addition, it was noted that the explanation for requiring A. and E.Z. to wear hoods was that this was a policy that had been laid down on the basis of the events of September 11, 2001, about the transport of
deportees with terrorist links.

"At about 3 a.m. the plane landed at Cairo. A. and E.Z. disembarked and were received by Egyptian officials. They were then driven off in a transit bus."

Despite Egypt's diplomatic assurance to Sweden that the two men would be treated humanely, Human Rights Watch says, based on testimony subsequently given by one of the two men, that they were subsequently tortured. U.N. Committees later decided Sweden had violated the Geneva Conventions by sending the men to Egypt.

"Egypt's promise not to torture was a mere fig leaf for the Swedish authorities," said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch, an independent non-governmental advocacy organization. "Transferring people to countries where they face torture violates international law, regardless of what empty promises a country gives… The U.N. committee noted that Egypt had a well-documented history of torture abuses, especially when dealing with terrorism suspects. It said that Egypt's routine use of torture, in combination with interest in Agiza by the U.S. as well as Egypt, should have led to a 'natural conclusion' that he was at risk of torture upon return."

Egypt — a key ally of the United States — has long been the second-largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, after only Israel. Its secret police are notorious for their brutality during interrogations. The U.S. State Department noted in a 2002 human rights report their frequent torture of prisoners, during which people were stripped, blindfolded, suspended from the ceiling or door frame with their feet just touching the floor; beaten with whips, fists, metal rods; subjected to electric shocks; and doused with cold water.

Canada Apologizes To Citizen

Canadian citizen Maher Arar was born in Syria in 1970 and emigrated to Canada as a teenager, settling in Montreal. In September 2002, he visited Tunisia with his family and was returning home to Canada via the United States. At New York's Kennedy International Airport he was arrested, strip-searched and then held in an immigration detention center for 12 days. On October 8, he was told he was being deported to Syria. Shackled, he was taken to New Jersey, put on an executive jet and flown to Jordan. The next day, blindfolded, he was driven across the border to Syria and taken to Far Falestin, the notorious detention center run by the Syrian military intelligence.

Witnesses to a Commission of Inquiry in Canada testified what they and Arar experienced in Far Falestin: "[They] closed the cell door. It was like a grave, exactly like a grave. It had no light. It was three feet wide. It was six feet deep. It was seven feet high." Arar told the Commission he met the person he later discovered was the head interrogator, identified as George Salloum, and gave this account:

Salloum introduced him to "the chair" — a torture device capable of breaking a detainee's back.

Arar could hear fellow prisoners screaming with pain. Soon he was receiving the same treatment. He was beaten about his body, four lashes with a two-foot-long electric cable that had been shredded. Then he was asked questions. The torture would stop and start, getting worse and worse. He admitted being trained by al Qaeda in Afghanistan only because he had decided to "say anything" necessary to avoid torture. He was constantly warned that "tomorrow will be worse." He slept only two or three hours a night, on a cold concrete floor, known to his guards only by his cell number: Two.

Arar reported that he and other detainees were doused with cold water and had the soles of their feet beaten with thick black plastic cables. Another detainee told investigators that he was ordered to undress, except for his underwear. Interrogators then poured cold water on his body while he stood. He was then laid on the floor and, as interrogators trained a fan on him, more cold water was poured over him. They asked him to raise his legs from the knee and started beating him with black rubber cables.

Arar confessed to membership in al Qaeda, even though the Canadian Commission of Inquiry subsequently found that he had absolutely no connection with the organization or terrorism. After 10 months and 10 days of detention, he was transferred to Sednaya Prison, also in Syria, where he reported that conditions were "like heaven" compared with Far Falestin. On October 5, 2003, he was released from custody after signing a "confession" given to him by a Syrian prosecutor. He has since been awarded $8.9 million in damages (and an official apology) by the Canadian government but remains on a U.S. terrorist watch list.

How The CIA's Cover Was Blown

The aircraft used to transfer detainees from one country to another were supposed to be part of a clandestine CIA operation, but a sloppy mistake blew their cover and helped European investigators create a comprehensive record of renditions.

One frequently used aircraft was Gulfstream N379P, whose trips included delivery of Agiza and El Zari to Egypt. The company that owned it, Premier Executive Transport Services, was a CIA front whose officers had post office box addresses where 325 fictitious names also were registered. The plane's connection began to emerge when another of its renditions got under way at 2:40 a.m. on October 23, 2001, at a little-used terminal at Karachi International Airport in Pakistan.

A 27-year-old Yemeni man, Jamil Qasim Saeed Mohammed, had been apprehended by the Pakistan intelligence service, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). He was taken blindfolded and in chains to be handed over to the CIA. Suspected of involvement in the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, he had been reported missing for three weeks from Karachi University, where he was studying microbiology. He was flown from Pakistan to Jordan and then promptly disappeared.

What gave this transfer significance was the clumsy way in which it was handled. According to Pakistani sources, an airport official at the Karachi airport demanded a landing fee from the CIA plane. The crew refused. ISI agents then instructed airport staff that they would pay the fees, and the plane took off. But the incident created a minor stir that drew attention to the Gulfstream, which had been tucked away in a quiet corner of the airport so as not to be conspicuous.

On October 26, 2001, Masood Anwar, a Pakistani journalist with The News in Islamabad, wrote how Mohammed claimed he had been flown out of the country aboard a plane bearing tail number N379P. Those details ricocheted via the Internet among spy-hunters, bloggers and plane-spotting enthusiasts curious about precisely how the newly declared war on terrorism was being conducted.

Research by human rights groups, journalists and European governments subsequently revealed that the CIA had operated some 30 aircraft disguised by the use of companies like Premier Executive Transport Services and in other ways. Other aircraft were leased to operating companies and their subsidiaries. Eurocontrol data showed that 32 such aircraft made at least 1,245 stopovers in the various European countries.

Dozens of flights went to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, where the U.S. was detaining terrorism suspects. European investigators believed many of the flights were for extraordinary renditions.
Eurocontrol data show the CIA planes made the following stopovers between October 2001 and the end of 2005: 76 in Azerbaijan; 72 in Jordan; 61 in Egypt; 52 in Turkmenistan; 46 in Uzbekistan; 40 in Iraq; 40 in Morocco; 38 in Afghanistan; and 14 in Libya.

Source:
http://www.publicintegrity.org/MilitaryAid/report.aspx?aid=855

 

[Cognescenti]

So let me get this straight. Techniques employed during the training of US troops to prepare them for hostile interrogations if captured, when applied to unlawful combatants constitute torture?

:thumbs_up


"....Finally loose hoods without holes for their eyes were placed over their heads. A. and E.Z. were then taken out of the police station in bare feet and led to the aircraft......"


Gasp! Oh the humanity!

The reason "extraordinary rendition" seems extraordinary is the US was not on a war footing before. Standard law enforcement, namby pamby approaches (like sending the FBI to comb trough bomb rubble of the Khobar Towers or the African embassy buildings didn't work.

 

[MTAFFI]

So let me get this straight. Techniques employed during the training of US troops to prepare them for hostile interrogations if captured, when applied to unlawful combatants constitute torture?

:thumbs_up


"....Finally loose hoods without holes for their eyes were placed over their heads. A. and E.Z. were then taken out of the police station in bare feet and led to the aircraft......"


Gasp! Oh the humanity!

The reason "extraordinary rendition" seems extraordinary is the US was not on a war footing before. Standard law enforcement, namby pamby approaches (like sending the FBI to comb trough bomb rubble of the Khobar Towers or the African embassy buildings didn't work.

well lets first look at the source of the information here, if you follow the link to the actual article you will find no links to these "declassified" documents, you will also find that it is wrote by an indepedent psychologist and this is all jsut his opinion.

But anyways, we are at war right? We do take prisoners in war right? What should we do with them to question them? I suppose force feeding them chocolate until they crack would do the trick, although I dont know if our troops would benefit from that training

 

[Muezzin]

Let me preface this by saying I am of no particular 'side' here, I just speak out against injustice where I see it, whoever is committing it.

That disclaimer will prove to be fairly pointless when I am passively aggresively flamed in reply, but meh.

"....Finally loose hoods without holes for their eyes were placed over their heads. A. and E.Z. were then taken out of the police station in bare feet and led to the aircraft......"


Gasp! Oh the humanity!

The U.S. makes hooded prisoners walk barefoot while keeping them in outdoor cages and justifying sexual humiliation because it's 'part of the training'. It's fine.

Iran makes prisoners sit on television and buys them cheap suits. The Iranians are monsters!

 

[MTAFFI]

Let me preface this by saying I am of no particular 'side' here, I just speak out against injustice where I see it, whoever is committing it.

That disclaimer will prove to be fairly pointless when I am passively aggresively flamed in reply, but meh.


The U.S. makes hooded prisoners walk barefoot while keeping them in outdoor cages and justifying sexual humiliation because it's 'part of the training'. It's fine.

Iran makes prisoners sit on television and buys them cheap suits. The Iranians are monsters!

Of course, the Iranians captured some sailors, who were allegedly in their waters, some of the interrogation techniques were revealed and the woman was actually terrorized, as they said they made her think they were going to kill her. The people in Gitmo did a lot more than tread in waters to end up there, questions have to be asked hard to get answers

 

[islamirama]

Of course, the Iranians captured some sailors, who were allegedly in their waters, some of the interrogation techniques were revealed and the woman was actually terrorized, as they said they made her think they were going to kill her. The people in Gitmo did a lot more than tread in waters to end up there, questions have to be asked hard to get answers

so you support torture like your master, bush. Even when international community condemed it, and they also condemed that place as did your closest allies and red cross and human rights groups.

What more can we expect from the ever so "compassionate" crusaders. You take "suspects" and torture them to death and then cry about why the world hates you.

 

[MTAFFI]

so you support torture like your master, bush. Even when international community condemed it, and they also condemed that place as did your closest allies and red cross and human rights groups.

What more can we expect from the ever so "compassionate" crusaders. You take "suspects" and torture them to death and then cry about why the world hates you.

again you make it seem as though I support Bush, what a laughable joke you are. I will say it again though, I dont support Bush but I do support my country, cant wait for a new president.

As for torture, it well known and documented that nearly every country in the world is guilty of torturing during war times, the US just happens to be the focus at this point. Personally, I believe we are at war with a group of people who will not give up information just because they are captured, and if that means hard questioning, to provide me with my security, then I say ask as hard as necessary.

 

[Cognescenti]

Let me preface this by saying I am of no particular 'side' here, I just speak out against injustice where I see it, whoever is committing it.

That disclaimer will prove to be fairly pointless when I am passively aggresively flamed in reply, but meh.


The U.S. makes hooded prisoners walk barefoot while keeping them in outdoor cages and justifying sexual humiliation because it's 'part of the training'. It's fine.

Iran makes prisoners sit on television and buys them cheap suits. The Iranians are monsters!

Let me see if I can keep my aggressive side in check, as you seem to be a very resonable person.

1) The excerpt from the article was in regard to the handling of those prisoners transported under "extraordinary rendition". It did not discuss the 'routine" prisoners transported after being captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan. To my knowledge, there has not been a claim of "sexual humiliation" of prisoners while under US custody in the extraordinary rendition program. You are mixing apples and oranges. That was Abu Ghraib, which was unauthroized and clearly sadistic. The commanding General was kicked out of the Army and several personally responsible are serving jail time.

2) "Outdoor cages"...those were cells, they were outdoors but it wasn't Alaska. The situation ahs been remedied. The US had no existing facility to house them...we sort of weren't expecting the 9-11 attack. BTW, several detainees at G'itmo have filed suit asking they not be transferred to their country of origin for more "humane" treatment.

3) Blindfolding super-high risk detainees during transport isn't torture. It is a security measure. This is the story of Louis Pepe, a US Federal prison guard:

Four years ago, Louis Pepe, a federal security guard, was assigned to a high-security wing at the Metropolitan Correction Center (MCC) reserved for some of the most dangerous international terrorists being held in federal custody including several alleged al Qaeda operatives. On November 1, 2000, Pepe was brutally attacked by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, a former top aide to Osama bin Laden who was awaiting trial on charges that included attempting to purchase nuclear weapons components.

Salim used hot sauces purchased in the prison to temporarily blind Mr. Pepe and then thrust a sharpened plastic comb three inches into Pepe’s left eye, resulting in severe brain damage, partial paralysis, the loss of his left eye and the loss of 60 percent of the vision in his right eye. Notes later found in Salim’s cell indicate that the attack may have been part of a plan to seize hostages in an effort to break out of jail.

3) As far as the Iranians and the cheap suits go...you are right, that wasn't torture, but mock executions certainly were. There is also the minor detail that the British sailors had done nothing wrong, they were in uniforms (at least until they changed to the suits) and were conducting a lawful activity under the direction of the UN and Iraqi goverment.

PS...I don't think the US invented the blindfold.
See anyone familiar in this picture?

 

[islamirama]

As for torture, it well known and documented that nearly every country in the world is guilty of torturing during war times, the US just happens to be the focus at this point. Personally, I believe we are at war with a group of people who will not give up information just because they are captured, and if that means hard questioning, to provide me with my security, then I say ask as hard as necessary.

US seems to go at greater lengths to torture "suspects" who have not even been proven by the court as criminalsl. all those people there are suspects who have been denied basic human rights. And US puts out laws that make those humans subhuman with no rights or anything. US also kidnaps people and send them to europe and other countries to its secrete torture cells. Don't know of any other country that does that.

As for your safety,look up the statistics. you have higher chance of being run over a car or any other crime in the US then a terrorists attack. but hey, you neocons gotta justify your injustice and war crimes some how, don't ya!

what you need is more black hawk down in iraq to send your troops packing home inshallah!

 

[wilberhum]

US seems to go at greater lengths to torture "suspects" who have not even been proven by the court as criminalsl. all those people there are suspects who have been denied basic human rights. And US puts out laws that make those humans subhuman with no rights or anything. US also kidnaps people and send them to europe and other countries to its secrete torture cells. Don't know of any other country that does that.

As for your safety,look up the statistics. you have higher chance of being run over a car or any other crime in the US then a terrorists attack. but hey, you neocons gotta justify your injustice and war crimes some how, don't ya!

what you need is more black hawk down in iraq to send your troops packing home inshallah!

Maybe we should have just beheaded them. Kind of like those that you favor.

 

[MTAFFI]

US seems to go at greater lengths to torture "suspects" who have not even been proven by the court as criminalsl. all those people there are suspects who have been denied basic human rights. And US puts out laws that make those humans subhuman with no rights or anything. US also kidnaps people and send them to europe and other countries to its secrete torture cells. Don't know of any other country that does that.

As for your safety,look up the statistics. you have higher chance of being run over a car or any other crime in the US then a terrorists attack. but hey, you neocons gotta justify your injustice and war crimes some how, don't ya!

what you need is more black hawk down in iraq to send your troops packing home inshallah!

Yes the US goes to greater lengths....lol... You must not read much about the Russians and the Chinese on your conspiracy sites huh? lol... Your own people in Afghanistan not only torture their detainees without a trial but they then behead them and desecrate their bodies by throwing them on the sides of roads. The only difference is there is no one to point the finger at, which is very convienent for people like you.

Also probably part of the reason there is so little risk of a terrorist attack is because many of them are being killed daily or are locked up at Gitmo, funny how when you remove a problem there ceases to be a problem, isnt it.

As for the black hawk down comment, again you are laughable, what you need is some good parent who will pay more attention to you and show you the difference between reality and your dreamworld. Oh yeah and keep talking like that, you never know who might be reading that terrorist talk.

 

[Cognescenti]

....As for your safety,look up the statistics. you have higher chance of being run over a car or any other crime in the US then a terrorists attack. but hey, you neocons gotta justify your injustice and war crimes some how, don't ya!

!

That is a completely specious argument. It wasn't an earthquake, guy. It was an intentional act of malice and the same crowd are possessed of the will to do it again.

It would be as if the Mayor of Pearl Harbor stood up in 1944 and asked "what are we spending all this money on? I havent' seen a Japanese plane in three years."

 

[islamirama]

Also probably part of the reason there is so little risk of a terrorist attack is because many of them are being killed daily or are locked up at Gitmo, funny how when you remove a problem there ceases to be a problem, isnt it.

what great logic you have, kill all those that hate you so they don't even think of attacking you. Yea i see your point, so are you going to go kill every single person in the world that hates you now?

As for the black hawk down comment, again you are laughable, what you need is some good parent who will pay more attention to you and show you the difference between reality and your dreamworld. Oh yeah and keep talking like that, you never know who might be reading that terrorist talk.

yea i can see how much freedom of speech i have in this "great land" thank you for reminding me that.

Maybe we should have just beheaded them. Kind of like those that you favor.

That would be more humane than what you did to innocent civilians...

Hidden Massacre of Fallujah

Hidden Massacre of Haditha

 

[MTAFFI]

what great logic you have, kill all those that hate you so they don't even think of attacking you. Yea i see your point, so are you going to go kill every single person in the world that hates you now?

Hate all you want, but the second that hate turns into a plane and 3000 innocent people dead, then yes, kill everyone else with that intention. It is a divine right given by God to protect my women and children. Any person that poses any threat to me or my family, that dares step foot on my property better believe they will not walk away.

yea i can see how much freedom of speech i have in this "great land" thank you for reminding me that.

Freedom of speech is one thing, condoning and promoting terrorism and acts of violence against the country you live in is treason and punishable by death.

 

[islamirama]

Hate all you want, but the second that hate turns into a plane and 3000 innocent people dead, then yes, kill everyone else with that intention. It is a divine right given by God to protect my women and children. Any person that poses any threat to me or my family, that dares step foot on my property better believe they will not walk away.

90% Americans Believe US Government Covering Up 9/11, guess your among the other 10% poor saps that is still clinging to lies and propaganda.

Freedom of speech is one thing, condoning and promoting terrorism and acts of violence against the country you live in is treason and punishable by death.

Not condeming the resistance groups for fighting the occupation of their land is promoting acts of violence in this country? you're starting to sound like bush now, "your either with us or against us"

yup, definitly no freedom of speech in this rat hole. What's next, you gona say that i should be put to death for treason?

 

[wilberhum]

November 2004, 8582 total votes. :-[
Boy, you need a life.
What more proof do you want? :?
I don't question for a moment that there is a "Cover up" in some areas.
That hardly means I think the CIA helped the Jews do 9/11. :raging:

 

[MTAFFI]

90% Americans Believe US Government Covering Up 9/11, guess your among the other 10% poor saps that is still clinging to lies and propaganda.

Not condeming the resistance groups for fighting the occupation of their land is promoting acts of violence in this country? you're starting to sound like bush now, "your either with us or against us"

yup, definitly no freedom of speech in this rat hole. What's next, you gona say that i should be put to death for treason?

wow yet another post from prisonplanet or infowars\

here is another poll that shows only 43% of americans believe in a coverup
http://www.askquestions.org/details.php?id=2

I bet if I made a poll on a conservative website about whether or not 9/11 was a coverup 90% of americans would not think it was, I guess you wouldnt think that since the poll was advertised on prisonplanet and infowars and the people that visit those sites may have done what the author of the site asked of them and went to cnn and voted, many of them probably more than once. What is your point anyways? Again you venture from the topic.

http://www.debunking911.com/

There are your answers

As for you comments about the treason your exact quote was
"what you need is more black hawk down in iraq"

that is treason

 

[islamirama]

wow yet another post from prisonplanet or infowars\

here is another poll that shows only 43% of americans believe in a coverup
http://www.askquestions.org/details.php?id=2

I bet if I made a poll on a conservative website about whether or not 9/11 was a coverup 90% of americans would not think it was, I guess you wouldnt think that since the poll was advertised on prisonplanet and infowars and the people that visit those sites may have done what the author of the site asked of them and went to cnn and voted, many of them probably more than once. What is your point anyways? Again you venture from the topic.

http://www.debunking911.com/

There are your answers

prison planet didn't make up those numbers, don't see the cnn logo on there or are you going to ignore that and show your friendly numbers? it's funny you bash sites question the validity of the "facts" presented to you and yet you promote DC gov't backed sites and quote them to me. What makes you think I wil listen to that crap. I saw the video of 9-11, i can judge for myself.

As for you comments about the treason your exact quote was
"what you need is more black hawk down in iraq"

that is treason

Treason on what grounds?

You have an occupation against the will of the people of iraq, with a war you waged illegally on faulty intelligence. And if i say those people should do to the invaders what the somalis did to their invaders, then that is my right to say. It does not qualify as treason, what's next? burning US flag is treason also?

 

[Muezzin]

Please stay on-topic everyone. I've tried to be a little patient in other threads, but the spam seems to get out of control. All this 9/11 stuff is not really on topic.