All this proves is how much smarter the Taliban and Al-Qaeda is. They don't take prisoners.

This is the only thing Obama had in mind when he said "open government".

That and no lobbyists.

Obama is in a head to head race with Jimmy Carter.

Make them watch soccer and listen to Castro speeches. They'll break.

What the newly declassified material does not convincingly demonstrate, however, is that Cheney is right when he insists that it was the agency's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques"including sleep deprivation, stress positions, violent physical contact, and waterboardingthat produced this useful information. In fact, though two of the newly released CIA reports offer examples of the kind of details that detainees surrendered, the reports do not say what information came as a result of harsh interrogation methods and what came from conventional questioning.

the inspector general said his investigation failed to "uncover any evidence that these plots were imminent."

"the reports do not say what information came as a result of harsh interrogation methods and what came from conventional questioning."

Had it knowingly come from harsh methods, Cheney would have been shouting it from the rooftops. That he didn't make a direct connection should say volumes to anyone who understands political-speak.

To those blithely dismissing all of this as things that don't seem particularly bothersome, I'd say two things:

(1) The fact that we are not really bothered any more by taking helpless detainees in our custody and (a) threatening to blow their brains out, torture them with drills, rape their mothers, and murder their children; (b) choking them until they pass out; (c) pouring water down their throats to drown them; (d) hanging them by their arms until their shoulders are dislocated; (e) blowing smoke in their face until they vomit; (f) putting them in diapers, dousing them with cold water, and leaving them on a concrete floor to induce hypothermia; and (g) beating them with the butt of a rifle -- all things that we have always condemend as "torture" and which our laws explicitly criminalize as felonies ("torture means. . . the threat of imminent death; or the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering . . .") -- reveals better than all the words in the world could how degraded, barbaric and depraved a society becomes when it lifts the taboo on torturing captives.

numerous detainees died in U.S. custody, often as a direct result of our "interrogation methods." Those who doubt that can read the details here and here. Those claiming there was no physical harm are simply lying -- death qualifies as "physical harm" -- and those who oppose prosecutions are advocating that the people responsible literally be allowed to get away with murder.

No investigations, no prosecutions.

-B.O., P.O.T.U.S.A.

The torture described in the CIA IG's report of abu zubadah, generated the false intelligence that Iraq and AQ were linked and was used to justify the invasion of Iraq.

The torture described in the CIA IG's report of abu zubadah, generated the false intelligence that Iraq and AQ were linked and was used to justify the invasion of Iraq.
#13 | Posted by truthhurts

No investigations, no prosecutions.

-B.O., P.O.T.U.S.A.

The Office of General Counsel (OGe) took
the lead in determining and documenting the legal parameters and
constraints for interrogations. OGe conducted independent researchand consulted extensively with Department of Justice (Doj) and
National Security Council (NSC) legal and policy' staff, Working with
Dol's Office of Legal Counsel (OLe), aGe determined that in most
instances relevant to the counterterrorism detention and
interrogation activities REDACTED
the criminal prohibition
against torture, 18 U.S.C. 2340-2340B, is the controlling legai
.constraint on interrogations of detainees outside the United States

(1) "torture" means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) "severe mental pain or suffering" means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and

(a) Offense. Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
(b) Jurisdiction. There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if
(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.
(c) Conspiracy. A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

All this proves is how much smarter the Taliban and Al-Qaeda is. They don't take prisoners.
#1 | Posted by mysterytoy at 2009-08-26 11:15 AM

American military murdered over 3000 "Taliban" in 2001 "for the hell of it". Rounded them up as they were sold to US forces in large groups (farmers captured by the real Taliban), imprisoned far away from any probing new sources inside of a remote, disused Afghani prison and then stuffed into water containers and shot in the desert. Their bodies of thousands of young men left to rot, laying out in broad daylight. Those who didn't get shot or pass out from extreme heat inside of the water containers but were too weak to survive without medical care were just dumped out of the containers and left to die. This was done to prop-up anti-Taraki Muslim fundamentalists and enable Taliban to continue opium production. Up until at least 1999 the United States government payed the salary of ALL Taliban officials - this continually benefits predatory oil interests and those Taliban are undoubtedly still getting paid to keep economic collectivism from kicking Opec out.

Why else do you imagine that "insurgent" body count are never released - particularly in Afghanistan?

Are you trying to convince me that 18 U.S.C. 2340-2340B is the relevant law to bear on this?

Too late. I'm just not convinced that Obama is interested in showing us how far down the rabbit hole we've already been. No matter what his rhetoric may imply (usually implies a lot, but makes very little explicit).

Are you trying to convince me that 18 U.S.C. 2340-2340B is the relevant law to bear on this?

Too late. I'm just not convinced that Obama is interested in showing us how far down the rabbit hole we've already been. No matter what his rhetoric may imply (usually implies a lot, but makes very little explicit).

#19 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

well the CIA and the DoJ would disagree, as copied from the CIA IG's report

he Torture Convention specifically prohibits
"torture," which it defines in Article 1 as: .
. any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or
mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as
obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession,
punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is
suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or
a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any
kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the
instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official
or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include
pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to'
lawful sanction. [Emphasis added.]
Article 4 of the Torture Convention provides that states party to the_
Convention are to ensure that all acts of "torture" are offenses under
their criminal laws. Article 16 additionally provides that each state
party "shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its
jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment

38. (VIIFOVO) The Torture Convention applies to the United
States only in accordance with the reservations and understandings
made by the United States at the time of ratification.w As explained
to the Senate by the Executive Branch prior to ratification:
Article 16 is arguably broader than existing U.S. law. The phrase
"cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" is a
standard formula in international instruments and is found in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant
. on Civil and Political Rights, and the European Conventionon
Human Rights. To the extent the phrase has been interpreted in the
context of those agreements, "cruel" and "inhuman" treatment or
punishment appears to be roughly equivalent to the treatment or
punishment barred in the United States by the Fifth, Eighth and
Fourteenth Amendments. "Degrading" treatment or punishment,
.however, has been interpreted as potentially including treatment
that would probably not be prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.
[Citing a ruling that German refusal to recognize individual's
gender change might be considered "degrading" treatment.] To
make clear that the United States construes the phrase to be
coextensive with its constitutional guarantees against cruel, .
unusual; and inhumane treatment, the following understanding is
recorrunended:
"The United States understands the term 'cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment,' as used in Article 16 of
the Convention, to mean the cruel, unusual, and inhumane .
treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth
arid/ or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the
United States. lll 7

I get you, TH. What can I say beyond I'll believe it when I see it? But unless this goes up the chain of command, something Obama has spoken against, these prosecutions are goind to have the smell of scat on them.

Kangaroo scat.

GIG's revie~ of the videotapes revealed
that the waterboard technique employed at was different
from the technique as described in the Dol opinion and used in the
SERE training. The difference was in the manner in which the
detainee's breathing was obstructed. At the SERE School and in the
Dol opinion". the subject's airflow is disrupted by the.firm application
of a damp cloth over the air passages; the interrogator applies a small
amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner. By contrast; the
Agency interrogator continuously applied large volumes
of water to a cloth that covered the detainee's mouth and nose.. One of
the psychologists/interrogators acknowledged that the Agency's use
of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and
explained that the Agency's technique is different because it is "for
real" and is more poignant and convincing,

evidenced in the final vv aterboarci se.s:-:ion of A.bu ZubJ-dah.
According to a senior eTC offict'r, the interrogatiun tea'nl.
-=onsidered Abu ZubJ~,dc1h tel L~'e .-C)111FdiclIlt and ~,'?tJltej tc
terminate EITs. believed c~bu Zubcn:dah continued to
withhold information,
generated substantial pressure from Headquarters tocontinue use of
the BITs. According to this senior officer, the decision to resume uS,e
of the waterboard on Abu Zuba dah was made b senior officers of
the DO
to assess Abu Zubaydah's compliance and witnessed the
final waterboard session, after-which, they reported back to
Headquarters that the EITs were no longer needed on Abu I -
Zubaydah.

within this heavily redacted paragraph is the following

the interrogators believed that they had broken Abu Zubaydah and no longer needed the use of EIT's. From on high it was ordered to continue to use EIT's. Likely this was done to generate the false intelligence linking AQ to Iraq and thus falsely justifying the invasion of iraq.

Check out any neighbor, without a hand or leg, from having served in the military:

Tortured for the rest of their life.

Were the innocents found on the streets of America?

Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right

Step 1: Grab the detainee's package.

Now you have the detainee by the balls. Note - the detainee should be restrained.

Step 2: Ask a question

If the detainee answers, you may release his scrotum. If the detainee refuses, apply firm and even pressure to the testicles until pain is apparent.

Step 3: Ask question again, if necessary.

If the detainee refuses to answer, continue to increase pressure and repeat step 3 as necessary.

#27 | Posted by ZombieHunter plagiarized from the following:

Step 1: Grab potential suitor's package.

Now you have potential suitor by the balls. Note - potential suitor should be restrained.

Step 2: Ask a question

If potential suitor answers, you may release his scrotum. If the detainee refuses, apply firm and even pressure to the testicles until pain is apparent.

Step 3: Ask question again, if necessary.

If potential suitor refuses to answer, continue to increase pressure and repeat step 3 as necessary.

Except from the CalifChris manual "How To Get A Date"

"Al-Qaeda Style"