Fully one third of Americans believe torture is just part of war

A recent poll by the International Red Cross (ICRC) shows more Americans and other westerners are more likely to accept torture, harsh interrogation techniques and indiscriminate bombing than they were in 1999.

A majority among those surveyed including in the U.S. still believe that bombing of populated areas and torturing detainees is wrong, but compared to an earlier survey rising numbers especially in the U.S. and the U.K. are willing to accept less humane practices if it means winning the battle quicker. However, those in areas subjected to the worst effects of wars were strongly in favor of the laws of war.

The survey was carried out between June and September of 2016, and involved 17,000 people in 16 different countries. A similar survey was carried out in 1999. Overall two-thirds of respondents thought torture was wrong but more approved harsh interrogation techniques than in 1999. ICRC Director-General,Yves Daccord, said: “In the U.S. in the last 15 years, torture seems like something which is accepted, as something that you use as a tool to get information, whereas the military interestingly enough will tell you this is not at all the tool you need to use. Not only is it not good for human dignity, but it doesn’t provide you with the right information.”

Ironically, President-elect Donald Trump, who has spoken in favor of torture, has nominated Marine General James Mattis for Secretary of Defense. In contrast to Trump, Mattis said he got further with a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers compared to using pain. In a statement Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff said:“The United States will never go back to waterboarding or any form of torture, something I believe the vast majority of the military, intelligence community and American public would never condone. Not only is it immoral, but it is also unconstitutional, ineffective and violative of both U.S. and international law."

In spite of the illegality of torture and its condemnation by many political and military officials, many in the American public accept it. One third of Americans consider torture simply part of war. 46 per cent believe an enemy combatant could be tortured to obtain important information. Just over half of Americans thought torture was wrong. Americans were more accepting of torture than Syrians, Afghans, Russians, Chinese and French.

More positive were the views of more than two thirds of those surveyed who believed that war should have limits. More than half of the respondents also felt that the Geneva Conventions kept wars from becoming worse. Three quarters of those surveyed believed attacks on hospitals and health-care providers were wrong. Russian respondents were even more disapproving of such acts than were Americans or the British. However, the actions of states with respect to the laws of war are often in contrast to majority public opinion on the matter.

Ewan Watson, who is head of Public Relations at the ICRC said of the effect of "War on Terror" rhetoric on public opinion:That definitely has gripped into popular culture. If you look at films which show torture in action, this notion of the ticking time bomb, that you must torture somebody to reveal information that will stop something tragic happening. All that provides a kind of rational framework for torture to happen. In fact, studies have shown that torture is not a method to obtain valid information. What it does, is just create enemies for life. This is in a sense ironic that people are more receptive to torture, which then creates the potential for hatred and revenge. Hence, it creates a vicious circle.Watson notes also that while International Humanitarian Law prohibits attacking healthcare facilities such attacks are seen on a daily basis on TV. He said states and non-state actors should realize that following the laws of war will not prevent them from winning and actually makes it easier to rehabilitate a country after a war is over since feelings of hatred and revenge have not been exacerbated by violations of the laws of war.

A more positive aspect of the survey is that the views of more than two thirds of those surveyed believed that war should have limits. More than half of the respondents also felt that the Geneva Conventions kept wars from becoming worse. Three quarters of those surveyed believed attacks on hospitals and health-care providers were wrong. Russian respondents were even more disapproving of such acts than were Americans or the British. The entire survey can be found on the IRC website.

Tough interrogations but no "torture" by CIA.

Of course the US will not say what it will and will not do and anything that it does allow will simply by definition not be torture. It is interesting that McConnell will not even deny the use of waterboarding.
Of course there is no verification through independent studies referenced that threat of torture has the great benefits that McConnell claims. In the case of actual torture some studies show that it usually does not work. Naturally people will tell you whatever you want to here so it is a sure way of getting "proof" for theories even if they are unlikely or even false.


US to stick with tough interrogations



WASHINGTON: The United States will press ahead with enhanced interrogation of terror suspects, which has saved “countless lives,” but will not engage in torture, the top US spymaster said on Sunday.

Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, however, refused to spell out whether techniques such as the alleged practice of “water boarding” were permitted under a new executive order of President George W Bush.

“The United States does not engage in torture. This executive order spells that out,” McConnell said on NBC television. But he indicated that the implied threat of torture had reaped dividends in extracting life-saving information from detainees.

“The techniques work. It’s not torture. But it is effective. It’s a psychological approach to causing someone to feel uncertainty,” McConnell said. “It has saved countless lives because (when those under interrogation) believe these techniques might involve torture ... they tend to speak to us in a very candid way.”

Iranian Diplomat claims he was tortured

It is difficult to know what to believe. We really can't know much about events such as these since the whole media circus is mostly arranged as part of psych warfare ops by both sides. It is a strange coincidence that the diplomat is released at the same time as the sailors. There seems to be no movement at all for the US to release its captive Iranians seized in Erbil at a quasi-consulate in spite of Iraq govt. requests.

Iranian diplomat says CIA tortured him in Iraq
Last Updated: Saturday, April 7, 2007 | 5:18 PM ET
The Associated Press
An Iranian diplomat freed two months after being abducted in Iraq accused the CIA of torturing him during his detention, state television reported Saturday. The U.S. immediately denied any involvement in the Iranian's disappearance or release.

Jalal Sharafi, who was freed on Tuesday, said the CIA questioned him about Iran's relations with Iraq and assistance to various Iraqi groups, according to state television.

"Once they heard my response that Iran merely has official relations with the Iraqi government and officials, they intensified tortures and tortured me through different methods days and nights," he said.

Sharafi's comments came a day after 15 British sailors released by Iran said they had been subject to psychological pressure and coercion in captivity. The sailors were captured in the Persian Gulf on March 23 for allegedly entering Iranian waters and released Wednesday.

At the time of his disappearance, Iran alleged Sharafi had been abducted by an Iraqi military unit commanded by American forces — a charge repeated by several Iraqi Shiite lawmakers. U.S. authorities denied any role in his disappearance.

"As we have said repeatedly, we were not involved in the abduction, detention or release of this individual," Lou Fintor, the U.S. Embassy spokesman in Baghdad, said Saturday.

A U.S. intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the CIA vehemently denies any role in the capture or release of Sharafi.

The official dismissed any claims of torture, saying "the CIA does not conduct or condone torture."

In the report Saturday read by a newscaster, Sharafi, second secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, said he was kidnapped by agents of an Iraqi organization operating under CIA supervision and was badly tortured.

State television said signs of torture were still visible on Sharafi, who is being treated at an Iranian hospital. Images of Sharafi were not shown.

Sharafi dropped near back of airport: report
The television quoted Sharafi as saying he was approached by agents while shopping in Baghdad. The agents allegedly showed him Iraqi Defence Ministry identification papers and were driving U.S. coalition vehicles.

He said they took him to a base near Baghdad airport and interrogated him in both Arabic and English, questioning him mainly about Iran's influence in Iraq, and assistance to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government and Iraqi groups. Sharafi did not provide additional details about his captors or their nationalities.

U.S. officials allege that Iran provides money and weapons to Iraqi Shiite militias.

After the initial interrogation, Sharafi said that his captors "softened their behaviour and showed leniency to encourage" him to co-operate.

"I explained I was unable to do anything outside my legal responsibilities," Sharafi was quoted as saying. "Later, they released me under pressure from Iraqi government officials. They dropped me near the back of the airport."

Several of the British crew members said Friday that they had been blindfolded, bound, kept in solitary confinement and subjected to psychological pressure during their captivity. They said they were coerced into saying they had been in Iranian waters when they were detained, and one said he believed one of his colleagues had
been executed on the second day of the ordeal.

Iran dismissed the crew members' news conference as propaganda — just as Britain had condemned the crew members' frequent appearances on Iranian TV during their captivity.

Iacobucci Inquiry an internal inquiry.

If the inquiry is mainly private there will probably be little news from it and little press or public interest. This is no doubt exactly what the government wants.
This inquiry could be much more damaging to Canadian intelligence services than the Arar inquiry. The Canadians not the US look to be the parties that caused Syrian authorities to arrest and torture these three suspects.


Lawyer demands Iacobucci inquiry be open to public

Andrew Mayeda
CanWest News Service


Saturday, February 17, 2007


OTTAWA -- The seal is barely off the Iacobucci inquiry, but the debate has already begun on how much of the judicial sequel to the Maher Arar inquiry should be made public.

The federal government announced in December that former Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci would lead an inquiry into the cases of Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad Abou El Maati and Muayyed Nurredin. Like Maher Arar, the three men allege they were imprisoned and tortured in Middle East prisons.

On Friday, the inquiry announced key legal and administrative staff who will assist with the review.

But in a sign of possible friction to come, Paul Copeland, a lawyer for Almalki, is already calling for the inquiry to be heard in public.

"My very strong preference would be one, that it be in public. Two, if it's not in public, that I be security cleared and can be in there," Copeland said.

"I'm not all that trustful of some of the government officials and some of their willingness to be forthright about what they did. There's a lots of people, I think, who may have things to hide, like Foreign Affairs, the Department of Justice, CSIS and the RCMP."

The inquiry was announced on the same day that Justice Dennis O'Connor tabled his second report into the Arar affair.

Much of the evidence in the Arar inquiry, which took nearly three years and about $16 million to complete, was heard in public.

The Iacobucci probe, however, is considered an "internal" inquiry. Under the terms of reference, Iacobucci has been directed to take "all steps necessary to ensure that the inquiry is conducted in private."

However, he is authorized to conduct parts of the inquiry in public "if he is satisfied that it is essential to ensure the effective conduct of the inquiry."

In calling an internal inquiry, the government cited a comment by O'Connor that there are more "appropriate" ways than a full-blown public inquiry to investigate national-security cases. The Arar inquiry was marked by delays and disputes over the disclosure of national-security evidence.

But skeptics fear the government may rush through a lightweight version of the Arar inquiry to avoid the same level of public scrutiny.

John Laskin, named on Friday as the inquiry's lead counsel, said Iacobucci will eventually decide how much of the inquiry will be public.

"The terms of reference basically say, "Do this in private unless there's a very, very compelling reason for having parts of it in public.' It'll be up to (Iacobucci) to decide if that kind of reasoning exists," said Laskin.

Another issue could be the timeline. The inquiry is under a tight deadline to report its findings to the government by Jan. 31, 2008.

Some experts have questioned whether that is enough time to sift through thousands of sensitive national-security files.

"We're acutely aware of the deadline and we are proceeding as expeditiously as we can," said Laskin.

The inquiry will begin accepting applications near the end of next month from groups, such as civil-liberties organizations, wishing to participate. It will then hear arguments on how the inquiry should proceed.

Almalki and El Maati were suspects in the same RCMP investigation that identified Arar as a "person of interest." Neither Almalki or El Maati have been charged. Nurredin was also questioned by Canadian security officials but hasn't been charged. All three were detained in Syria around the same time as Arar. El Maati was also imprisoned in Egypt. A fact finder who verified Arar's claims of torture also found the three men had been tortured.

The inquiry will investigate what role Canadian officials may have had in the detention of the three men.

© CanWest News Service 2007

Solitary confinement at Guantanamo: Chinese Uighurs

Many of the prisoners at Guantanamo seem to be there as a result of bounty hunters. Who knows how many are there just because someone wanted to settle a score and earn money at the same time?

This Slow And Daily Tampering With The Mysteries Of The Brain
by hilzoy

From today's Washington Post:


"Chinese Uighurs who have been imprisoned for the past month at a new state-of-the-art detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are being held around the clock in near-total isolation, a circumstance their lawyers say is rapidly degrading their mental health, according to an affidavit filed in federal court yesterday. (...)

The Uighurs' (pronounced weegurs) detention by the U.S. military, after being sold for bounty by Pakistanis in early 2002, has long attracted controversy. The men had just arrived from Afghanistan, where, they said, they had received limited military training because they opposed Chinese government control of their native region. But they said they never were allied with the Taliban or opposed to the United States, and had fled to Pakistan only to escape the U.S. bombing campaign.

By 2005, U.S. military review panels determined that five of the 18 captured Uighurs were "no longer enemy combatants," but they continued to be held at the Guantanamo Bay prison until their release last year. The panels did not reach that conclusion about the other 13, though all had given similar accounts of their activities during the reviews, according to declassified transcripts of the sessions. (...)

Lawyers for the remaining 13 Uighurs say the men were moved in December to Guantanamo Bay's Camp 6, a high-security facility at the base completed last August at a cost of $37.9 million. The lawyers say the government provided no explanation for the move, which came shortly after they filed a court petition in Washington seeking the expedited review.

In Camp 6, the Uighurs are alone in metal cells throughout the day, are prohibited for the most part from conversing with others, and take all their meals through a metal slot in the door, lawyer P. Sabin Willett said in his affidavit, which was based on what he was told during his visit Jan. 15-18. They have little or no access to sunlight or fresh air, have had nothing new to read in their native language for the past several years, and are sometimes told to undertake solitary recreation at night, he said.

"They pass days of infinite tedium and loneliness," according to Willett's court filing. One Uighur's "neighbor is constantly hearing voices, shouting out, and being punished. All describe a feeling of despair . . . and abandonment by the world." Another Uighur, named Abdusumet, spoke of hearing voices himself and appeared extremely anxious during Willett's visit, tapping the floor uncontrollably, he said.

The account matches another offered by Brian Neff, a lawyer who in mid-December visited a Yemeni imprisoned in Camp 6. "Detainees in Camp 6 are not supposed to talk to others, they are punished for shouting, and if they talk during walks outside they will be punished," Neff said in an e-mail yesterday. "We are extremely concerned about the . . . conditions of Camp 6 -- in particular, the fact that the detainees there are being held in near-total isolation, cut off from the outside world and any meaningful contact.""


Two weeks ago I wrote about the effects of solitary confinement. It drives people crazy. Here's an academic description (pdf):


"In my opinion, solitary confinement - that is confinement of a prisoner alone in a cell for all or nearly all of the day, with minimal environmental stimulation and minimal opportunity for social interaction - can can cause severe psychiatric harm. This harm includes a specific syndrome which has been reported by many clinicians in a variety of settings, all of which have in common features of inadequate, noxious and/or restricted environmental and social stimulation. In more severe cases, this syndrome is associated with agitation, self-destructive behavior, and overt psychotic disorganization.

In addition, solitary confinement often results in severe exacerbation of a previously existing mental condition, or in the appearance of a mental illness where none had been observed before. Even among inmates who do not develop overt psychiatric illness as a result of confinement in in solitary, such confinement almost inevitably imposes significant psychological pain during the period of isolated confinement and often significantly impairs the inmate's capacity to adapt successfully to the broader prison environment."


And another (Hinkle, L. & Wolf, H. (1956), 'Communist Interrogation and Indoctrination of `Enemies of the States': Analysis of Methods Used by the Communist State Police.' Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry (Vol. 1956, pp. 115-174)., quoted in the document linked above (p. 27)):


"He becomes increasingly anxious and restless and his sleep is disturbed ... The period of anxiety, hyperactivity, and apparent adjustment to the isolation routine usually continues from 1 to 3 weeks. ... The prisoner becomes increasingly dejected and dependent. He gradually gives up all spontaneous activity within his cell and ceases to care about personal appearance and actions. Finally, he sits and stares with a vacant expression, perhaps endlessly twisting a button on his coat. He allows himself to become dirty and disheveled. ... He goes through the motions of his prison routine automatically, as if he were in a daze. ... Ultimately, he seems to lose many of the restraints of ordinary behavior. He may soil himself; he weeps; he mutters. ... It usually takes from 4 to 6 weeks to produce this phenomenon in a newly imprisoned man. ... His sleep is disturbed by nightmares. Ultimately he may reach a state of depression in which he ceases to care about his personal appearance and behavior and pays very little attention to his surroundings. In this state the prisoner may have illusory experiences. A distant sound in the corridor sounds like someone calling his name. The rattle of a footstep may be interpreted as a key in the lock opening the cell. Some prisoners may become delirious and have visual hallucinations.

Not all men who first experience total isolation react in precisely this manner. In some, the symptoms are less conspicuous. In others, dejection and other despondence earlier, or later. Still others, and especially those with preexisting personality disturbances, may become frankly psychotic."


Here is a table showing the prevalence of some psychiatric symptoms among prisoners in solitary confinement in a supermax prison:

Symptom % Presence Among Prisoners
Ruminations 88
Irrational anger 88
Oversensitivity to stimuli 86
Confused thought process 84
Social withdrawal 83
Chronic depression 77
Emotional flatness 73
Mood, emotional swings 71
Overall deterioration 67
Talking to self 63
Violent fantasies 61
Perceptual distortions 44
Hallucinations 41
Suicidal thoughts 27

Think about that. Fully 41% of the supermax prisoners have hallucinations, as compared to 1.7% of the general population. Likewise, 84% report 'confused thought processes', as compared to 10.8% of the general population.

To convey what solitary confinement does to a person would take a truly gifted writer; luckily for us, a truly gifted writer made the attempt. Here is Charles Dickens, on his visit to a Philadelphia prison where people were kept in solitary confinement:


"There was a sailor who had been there upwards of eleven years, and who in a few months’ time would be free. Eleven years of solitary confinement!

‘I am very glad to hear your time is nearly out.’ What does he say? Nothing. Why does he stare at his hands, and pick the flesh upon his fingers, and raise his eyes for an instant, every now and then, to those bare walls which have seen his head turn grey? It is a way he has sometimes.

Does he never look men in the face, and does he always pluck at those hands of his, as though he were bent on parting skin and bone? It is his humour: nothing more.

It is his humour too, to say that he does not look forward to going out; that he is not glad the time is drawing near; that he did look forward to it once, but that was very long ago; that he has lost all care for everything. It is his humour to be a helpless, crushed, and broken man."


And here, finally, is Sabin Willett (pdf), the Uighurs' lawyer, on his clients:


"The January 15 meeting was my third meeting with Abdusemet. In previous meetings he had struck me as a kindly man, quite gentle, pleasant in affect, calm, and prone to smile and laugh. On January 15 he appeared extremely anxious. His foot tapped the floor uncontrollably. His affect was deeply sad. He refused offers of the food we had brought. He appeared to be in despair.

He said Camp 6 was "the dungeon above the ground." He said that when they led him into Camp 6, he recalled a movie he had once seen aout a Nazi concentration camp, "a place where, when they take you in, you never come out." (...)

Abdusemet asked us to communicate a message from one of the other Uighurs on his pod to his wife: "Tell her to remarry. She should consider me dead."

Abdusemet asked me, "What did we do? Why do they hate us so much?" (...)

Abdulnasser said he felt as though he were living underground, "in tunnels." He said he knew the building was above ground, but that it felt underground. He said our visit was "a single ray of light in a place of darkness." (...)

Abdusemet, Khalid and Abdulnasser said they had been visited by a "doctor," to ask, whether they were mentally stable. Following these visits, according to Abdulnasser (who understands some English), MPs taunted him with statements like, "Are you going crazy yet?" (...)

Abdusemet advised that one of the other Uighurs on his block was "hearing voices," and had been shouting out indiscriminately. Abdusemet said the man had been punished by being forced to wear the orange jumpsuit.

Abdusemet said, "I am starting to hear voices, sometimes. There is no one to talk to in my cell and I hear these voices.""



These men were captured by bounty hunters nearly five years ago. They are in all likelihood innocent of any crime, and of any act against the United States; they have certainly never been tried and convicted of any. We have held them in captivity since then, away from their wives and families. If they returned home now, their children probably wouldn't recognize them -- and as those of you who have kids will surely recognize, those are some of the saddest words there are.

And now, for some unfathomable reason, we have decided to lock them up in solitary, where we are driving them insane. Even if they were guilty, this would be wrong: having your mind and your spirit broken apart should not be the penalty for any crime. Our government is doing it to the innocent.

I'll leave the last word to Charles Dickens, who is a better writer than I am:


"I believe that very few men are capable of estimating the immense amount of torture and agony which this dreadful punishment, prolonged for years, inflicts upon the sufferers; and in guessing at it myself, and in reasoning from what I have seen written upon their faces, and what to my certain knowledge they feel within, I am only the more convinced that there is a depth of terrible endurance in it which none but the sufferers themselves can fathom, and which no man has a right to inflict upon his fellow-creature. I hold this slow and daily tampering with the mysteries of the brain, to be immeasurably worse than any torture of the body: and because its ghastly signs and tokens are not so palpable to the eye and sense of touch as scars upon the flesh; because its wounds are not upon the surface, and it extorts few cries that human ears can hear; therefore I the more denounce it, as a secret punishment which slumbering humanity is not roused up to stay. I hesitated once, debating with myself, whether, if I had the power of saying ‘Yes’ or ‘No,’ I would allow it to be tried in certain cases, where the terms of imprisonment were short; but now, I solemnly declare, that with no rewards or honours could I walk a happy man beneath the open sky by day, or lie me down upon my bed at night, with the consciousness that one human creature, for any length of time, no matter what, lay suffering this unknown punishment in his silent cell, and I the cause, or I consenting to it in the least degree."

Posted by hilzoy at 10:54 PM in Torture and Detention | Permalink

Arar inquiry told Canadians were beggars not choosers in Syria

Reading this is sickening. Nothing happens to people such as Pillarella. He can perjure himself with immunity. At least the RCMP commissioner had to resign when he subsequently gave contradictory testimony. No one of those who provided false information to the US was ever disciplined. In fact some of the figures have been promoted since. This is an old article but still relevant.


Arar inquiry told Canadians were 'beggars, not choosers'
Last Updated: Thursday, June 16, 2005 | 8:43 AM ET
CBC News
The former Canadian ambassador to Syria says the country offered to allow a Canadian security officer to attend its interrogation of Maher Arar.
Franco Pillarella's admission came on a day that included some obvious contradictions in his testimony.

Pillarella says the offer was made by the head of Syrian military intelligence so that Canada could see that everything was being done above board.



Franco Pillarella, former Canadian ambassador to Syria.

In the end, nobody from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service sat in on the interrogation, though Pillarella did not explain why.

Pillarella was testifying in the inquiry looking into the arrest and deportation of Arar to Syria in the fall of 2002.

Arar, a Canadian citizen, was deported in September 2002 by U.S. authorities after they arrested him in New York as he was flying home to Canada. The Ottawa engineer spent almost a year in prison and says he was repeatedly tortured.

Continue Article

Pillarella's testimony on Wednesday contradicted his testimony from a day earlier. He acknowledged that he knew of the detention camp where Arar says he was tortured, something he had categorically denied.

The Palestine Branch detention camp is mentioned as a torture centre in numerous reports on Syria by groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

Pillarella, who once headed the Human Rights Division at Foreign Affairs, was asked on Tuesday if he knew of it. He said, "No."

But when Arar's lawyer took up the same theme on Wednesday the answer changed. "I might have been aware of it ... yes," said Pillarella.

Pillarella also testified earlier that he did not dare ask the Syrians where Arar was being held, much less ask to see the conditions he was held in. He said Canadians were "beggars, not choosers" and did not want to risk offending the Syrians and losing contact with Arar.

"I was using every tool I had at my disposal and I must say I did not have that many."

But he revealed that the chief of Syrian intelligence had offered early in Arar's detention to allow a CSIS officer to personally attend Arar's interrogations. The general said he would only grant such a privilege to Canada, that he had turned down similar requests from the Americans and the British.

Canada never took him up on the offer.

Abdullah Al Malki Website

http://www.abdullahalmalki.ca/

THis is a website concerning one of three Canadians who were imprisoned in Syria. AlMalki was a target of a project called A O Canada a group that also targetted Maher Arar. Almalki was kept in a Syrian jail and tortured even longer than Arar. There is an upcoming inquiry into AlMalki's case and two other Canadians with Frank Iacobucci heading the inquiry.