Torture memos

[Pete Zicato]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_convention

Originally Posted by Pete Zicato

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_convention

And UNCAT (UN Convention Against Torture) signed by Reagan and US law...AND, the very moral foundation on which this country was built.

[classicman]

From Redux's link

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 sanctions.
– Convention Against Torture, Article 1.1

Exactly what doesn't that include?

[Pete Zicato]

Either they are prisoners of war - in which case we hold them until the war is over according to the rules of the Geneva convention.

Or they are (accused) criminals in which case they should get a speedy and fair trial. Punishment according to law if/when they are proven guilty.

You are looking for an excuse for torture. If we stoop to that level, how are we better than any third world dictatorship?

[classicman]

No I'm not. I'm trying to figure out what forms of interrogation are allowed in your opinion. The description from the link is very ambiguous.

[Pete Zicato]

In general I'd say: No pain. No killing. No pushing to the brink of death.

So are we talking your basic POW captured in battle or some guy accused of working for al qaeda? If the latter has a trial occurred?

[classicman]

I dunno what interrogation tactics are allowed. Sounds like none.

Laws against torture are not codified to the level of specific individual acts, but to standards of behavior.

Much like "assault" is not codified by individual acts. but by standards..."causing serious physical or bodily harm." Hundreds of years of common law understand what that means...just as common law understand what is meant by "severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental"

And no. I am not suggesting any correlation between torture and assault...just an example of how such acts are codified.

Legal interrogation tactics are more psychological... like building a sense of trust, exploiting a detainee’s self-love or allegiance to or resentment of the persons with whom he was aligned, or convincing the person off the futility of his position, etc.

These techniques are not only legal, but also, according to many interrogation experts, more effective. Applied in the right combination, they will work on nearly all detainees...and the US military identifies these techniques as the best way to induce detainees to divulge information.

When you are a nation of laws, you live by those laws.

[classicman]

gotcha. I was wondering if there were specific things that could be done physically that were determined to be torture vs others that were not. I was trying to determine where that "line" was/is.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

gotcha. I was wondering if there were specific things that could be done physically that were determined to be torture vs others that were not. I was trying to determine where that "line" was/is.

What is the purpose? Interrogation or punishment? Torture does not result in useful information. That was even understood in WWII. And demonstrated by Indonesia by taking prisoners out for dinner while keeping torture crazy Americans away. As a result, the entire Jemaah Islamiya terrorist organization was disassembled.

What is the purpose? Interrogation or inflicting pain. These are mutually exclusive objectives.

[classicman]

Thanks for not helping. Please feel free to not reply to my posts, especially any not directed specifically at you, in the future. Have a blessed day.

Originally Posted by classicman

Thanks for not helping. Please feel free to not reply to my posts, especially any not directed specifically at you, in the future. Have a blessed day.

I thought it was a helpful contribution to the discussion....clear and succinct, with no animosity directed towards anyone.

"What is the purpose? Interrogation or inflicting pain. These are mutually exclusive objectives."

Classic...what specifically do you find pointless or not helpful?

[classicman]

I guess I am not communicating clearly. Perhaps it is my fault.

We weren't discussing "punishment?" Nor rehashing the "Torture does not result in useful information." argument.

But again that is just my opinion and its worth what you paid for it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Thanks for not helping. Please feel free to not reply to my posts, especially any not directed specifically at you, in the future.

Your post applies to every decent person in the world. Which do you want advocate? Inflict pain or interrogate them? These are mutually exclusive options - except when Cheney and others promoted hate, fear and lies. Which one do you advocate? Do we punish them with pain. Or do we extract useful information - as Indonesia did to completely subvert Jemaah Islamiya? The Bali bombings that killed hundreds of Australians? Solved by not using torture and by overtly denying Cheney's people access.

What part do you not understand? Do we inflict pain as Americans did in Guantanamo, Abu Ghriad and secret prisons elsewhere in the world? Or do we do what decent people - ie Indonesians - throughout the world did to stop terrorism? Decent people even talk to our enemies. Which do you advocate? It’s a simple and logical question. Torture or interrogation? Mutually exclusive concepts. Political spin does not negate the question. Which one do you advocate?

[tw]

From The Washington Post of 6 Oct 2007:
Fort Hunt's Quiet Men Break Silence on WWII
Interrogators Fought 'Battle of Wits'

For six decades, they held their silence.

The group of World War II veterans kept a military code and the decorum of their generation, telling virtually no one of their top-secret work interrogating Nazi prisoners of war at Fort Hunt.

When about two dozen veterans got together yesterday for the first time since the 1940s, many of the proud men lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.

Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners' cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them.

"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.

Blunt criticism of modern enemy interrogations was a common refrain at the ceremonies held beside the Potomac River near Alexandria. Across the river, President Bush defended his administration's methods of detaining and questioning terrorism suspects during an Oval Office appearance.

Several of the veterans, all men in their 80s and 90s, denounced the controversial techniques. And when the time came for them to accept honors from the Army's Freedom Team Salute, one veteran refused, citing his opposition to the war in Iraq and procedures that have been used at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

"I feel like the military is using us to say, 'We did spooky stuff then, so it's okay to do it now,' " said Arno Mayer, 81, a professor of European history at Princeton University.

When Peter Weiss, 82, went up to receive his award, he commandeered the microphone and gave his piece.

"I am deeply honored to be here, but I want to make it clear that my presence here is not in support of the current war," said Weiss, chairman of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy and a human rights and trademark lawyer in New York City.

The veterans of P.O. Box 1142, a top-secret installation in Fairfax County that went only by its postal code name, were brought back to Fort Hunt by park rangers who are piecing together a portrait of what happened there during the war.

Nearly 4,000 prisoners of war, most of them German scientists and submariners, were brought in for questioning for days, even weeks, before their presence was reported to the Red Cross, a process that did not comply with the Geneva Conventions. Many of the interrogators were refugees from the Third Reich.

"We did it with a certain amount of respect and justice," said John Gunther Dean, 81, who became a career Foreign Service officer and ambassador to Denmark.

The interrogators had standards that remain a source of pride and honor.

"During the many interrogations, I never laid hands on anyone," said George Frenkel, 87, of Kensington. "We extracted information in a battle of the wits. I'm proud to say I never compromised my humanity."

Exactly what went on behind the barbed-wire fences of Fort Hunt has been a mystery that has lured amateur historians and curious neighbors for decades.

During the war, nearby residents watched buses with darkened windows roar toward the fort day and night. They couldn't have imagined that groundbreaking secrets in rocketry, microwave technology and submarine tactics were being peeled apart right on the grounds that are now a popular picnic area where moonbounces mushroom every weekend.

When Vincent Santucci arrived at the National Park Service's George Washington Memorial Parkway office as chief ranger four years ago, he asked his cultural resource specialist, Brandon Bies, to do some research so they could post signs throughout the park, explaining its history and giving it a bit more dignity.

That assignment changed dramatically when ranger Dana Dierkes was leading a tour of the park one day and someone told her about a rumored Fort Hunt veteran.

It was Fred Michel, who worked in engineering in Alexandria for 65 years, never telling his neighbors that he once faced off with prisoners and pried wartime secrets from them.

Michel directed them to other vets, and they remembered others.

Bies went from being a ranger researching mountains of topics in stacks of papers to flying across the country, camera and klieg lights in tow, to document the fading memories of veterans.

He, Santucci and others have spent hours trying to sharpen the focus of gauzy memories, coaxing complex details from men who swore on their generation's honor to never speak of the work they did at P.O. Box 1142.

"The National Park Service is committed to telling your story, and now it belongs to the nation," said David Vela, superintendent of the George Washington Memorial Parkway.

There is a deadline. Each day, about 1,100 World War II veterans die, said Jean Davis, spokeswoman for the U.S. Army's Freedom Team Salute program, which recognizes veterans and the parents, spouses and employers who provide support for active-duty soldiers.

By gathering at Fort Hunt yesterday, the quiet men could be saluted for the work they did so long ago.