Destroyed Tapes Show CIA Prisons In Thailand

[britmaveric]

As far as waterborading goes, it is torture. It causes an unbelievable amount of distress and is very difficult to breath. Water is continously poured over the person near to drowing or suffocation.

So does cutting off ones head.

If you compare the violence inflicted by the US of A throughout the last 50 years and the violence it has received so far, it´s just waiting for another 12,567 deserved 9/11´s. Let´s face it, it not Moslim terrorism that is the main aggressor,it´s the foreign policies of Uncle Sam´s land!

[stumonster]

I am sure it has been acknowledged elsewhere - but with the amount of CIA agents on barstools in the local area I would have thought it was obvious the seppos were running a major operation in Thailand .

[Ricardo]

Yes, what a shame. The CIA should have just hacked their heads off with a dull knife and had it videotaped just like what happened to the Brit and American in Iraq.

The point, according to the OP, is that the CIA did videotape their own use of torture, but then correctly got embarrassed about it, and wanted to destroy the tapes.

Some people seem to think that it is OK, for the forces of good, to be just as barbaric as the terrorists. Wrongly IMHO - or what are they fighting for ? Revenge ??

[bulmercke]

I am sure it has been acknowledged elsewhere - but with the amount of CIA agents on barstools in the local area I would have thought it was obvious the seppos were running a major operation in Thailand .

They were - and possibly still are - with the 'action' taking place within a stone's throw of Lumpini park. Go figure!

[Ricardo]

Let the CIA do whatever they want to these guys (short of mutilating them) to find out out any information they can.

And if it turns out that, for some reason, the CIA 'lifted' the wrong person, how will you apologise, and make amends ?

The criminals involved are savages.

Agreed that terrorists are savages, but at least some of the People subsequently released from Guantanamo Bay, were innocent. Which is why we have 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Someone who could potentially organize a suicide bombing or carry one out themselves deserves no remorse or sympathy.

As far as waterborading goes, it is torture. It causes an unbelievable amount of distress and is very difficult to breath. Water is continously poured over the person near to drowing or suffocation.

So does cutting off ones head.

So would you not agree, that both actions are wrong, and should be equally condemned ?

[ironhut]

Some of you people are unbelievable. Apparently many have a tough time here relating to the real victims of some of these terrorists acts. Believe it or not, we're all suffering here from mass bombings and future threats... We just want it stopped and want to get to the bottom of the acts.

So.....if one of these guys for a fact is involved with or has knowledge of killing YOUR parent or child via one of many unthinkable acts (or one yet to come), you're going to worry about HIS rights?!?

I don't think you'd just sit there and be easy on the guy. Or...then again maybe some of you would from some of what I've read here.

We're talking about "waterboarding".....where the person believes he is drowning, but in a controlled environment. He thinks that death is imminent, so he talks (which is what we all want, right?). There is no physical damage.

[Ricardo]

Some of you people are unbelievable. Apparently many have a tough time here relating to the real victims of some of these terrorists acts.

Your evidence for this outrageous statement ? That some of us condemn torture or terrorism by whoever carries it out ? The terrorist-victim & tortured innocent-man are both equally victims of extreme injustice !

Believe it or not, we're all suffering here from mass bombings and future threats... We just want it stopped and want to get to the bottom of the acts.

Agreed - but this does not justify atrocities or torture, by either 'side'.

So.....if one of these guys for a fact is involved with or has knowledge of killing YOUR parent or child via one of many unthinkable acts (or one yet to come), you're going to worry about HIS rights?!?

How do you know he's involved for a fact ? Until it is proved, darned right I am concerned about physical-torture, of a potentially-innocent person. What if it's you who is mistakenly in the 'hot seat' ? Don't you want me to be against your being tortured ?

I don't think you'd just sit there and be easy on the guy. Or...then again maybe some of you would from some of what I've read here. How to win arguements - by slurring your opponents ?

We're talking about "waterboarding".....where the person believes he is drowning, but in a controlled environment. He thinks that death is imminent, so he talks (which is what we all want, right?). There is no physical damage.

Which fits the definition of torture quoted earlier.

What you're saying here, and I exagerate only slightly, is that torture is OK, because it's done by 'our' guys, who never make mistakes or get carried-away, and anyway they're probably all guilty.

If you simply want the the prisoner to talk, as I do too, can't you use drugs or a lie-detector, to find out the truth ? I suspect that there is an element of revenge here, which is totally wrong, because some of these people are later found to be innocent. I repeat the point which I made earlier - how would you apologise, to an innocent man, who you had just wrongly tortured ?

Let alone the likely result of false-confessions, misleading the anti-terrorist effort.

[moldy]

Simulated drowning !!! . What's simulated about it? Did they just play a video game or something? Sick or what? Kind of makes you wonder who the enemies and terrorists really are

It's called waterboarding and is highly simulated. You trigger the targets reflexes of fear of drowning, nothing else. No physical damage is done.

Oh well that makes it alright then. Why not have a try out yourself then?

[meom]

I repeat the point which I made earlier - how would you apologise, to an innocent man, who you had just wrongly tortured ?

Let alone the likely result of false-confessions, misleading the anti-terrorist effort.

That will always be the problem whatever you do there will be innocent people in harms way so I guess in the end it comes down to how many innocent people or collateral damage are you prepared to accept in the fight against terrorism, crime, drugs etc..

[moldy]

I repeat the point which I made earlier - how would you apologise, to an innocent man, who you had just wrongly tortured ?

Let alone the likely result of false-confessions, misleading the anti-terrorist effort.

That will always be the problem whatever you do there will be innocent people in harms way so I guess in the end it comes down to how many innocent people or collateral damage are you prepared to accept in the fight against terrorism, crime, drugs etc..

Let's hope you still feel that way if you ever find yourself in the firing line.

[moldy]

Some of you people are unbelievable. Apparently many have a tough time here relating to the real victims of some of these terrorists acts.

Your evidence for this outrageous statement ? That some of us condemn torture or terrorism by whoever carries it out ? The terrorist-victim & tortured innocent-man are both equally victims of extreme injustice !

Believe it or not, we're all suffering here from mass bombings and future threats... We just want it stopped and want to get to the bottom of the acts.

Agreed - but this does not justify atrocities or torture, by either 'side'.

So.....if one of these guys for a fact is involved with or has knowledge of killing YOUR parent or child via one of many unthinkable acts (or one yet to come), you're going to worry about HIS rights?!?

How do you know he's involved for a fact ? Until it is proved, darned right I am concerned about physical-torture, of a potentially-innocent person. What if it's you who is mistakenly in the 'hot seat' ? Don't you want me to be against your being tortured ?

I don't think you'd just sit there and be easy on the guy. Or...then again maybe some of you would from some of what I've read here. How to win arguements - by slurring your opponents ?

We're talking about "waterboarding".....where the person believes he is drowning, but in a controlled environment. He thinks that death is imminent, so he talks (which is what we all want, right?). There is no physical damage.

Which fits the definition of torture quoted earlier.

What you're saying here, and I exagerate only slightly, is that torture is OK, because it's done by 'our' guys, who never make mistakes or get carried-away, and anyway they're probably all guilty.

If you simply want the the prisoner to talk, as I do too, can't you use drugs or a lie-detector, to find out the truth ? I suspect that there is an element of revenge here, which is totally wrong, because some of these people are later found to be innocent. I repeat the point which I made earlier - how would you apologise, to an innocent man, who you had just wrongly tortured ?

Let alone the likely result of false-confessions, misleading the anti-terrorist effort.

Well said that man. A great point. Just play some rap music in his head for a few hours.

[Tony Clifton]

Used against suspected members...a bit hard to tell them what they want to know if you are innocent in the first place.

This is vile beyond words but apparently it is ok because the US Govt has defined this method of interrogation as not being torture.

I am sorry to see that the Thai Govt is involved although you have to wonder what pressure was put on them by the US and if they were aware of what was actually going on.

Once you start walking down the path of the ends justify the means you are in a moral black hole.

I hope the new Thai Govt makes it clear that no such facility will ever again be provided to the US.

Pressure is put on smaller countries by U.S. trained scumbags called "Economic Hitmen".

http://www.google.ca/search?num=30&hl=...earch&meta=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33zdHNvWgEU

[Chloe82]

I was taught in World Religions class that every major religion has a golden rule such as "Treat other people the way you would want them to treat you." Waterboarding and other forms of torture violate that command, as well as Jesus' command, "Love your enemies....so that you be the children of God." President Bush claims to follow Jesus, but he surely does not. Thailand has lost face because of this. It is a disgraceful bunch of sins, nothing less.

Rubbish, sometimes you have to fight fire with fire, take the gloves off and level the playing field. Some of these people know no limits in their actions.

Good on Thailand if they did allow this on home soil, i believe the UK was accused of the exact same thing either last year or the year before.

We keep hearing islam is a religion of peace. And if you dare to criticize or make light of it, may you rest in peace.

Chloe.

[DavidLeeRoth]

If you simply want the the prisoner to talk, as I do too, can't you use drugs or a lie-detector, to find out the truth ?

Hahaha, yeah right! We use lie-detector tests on TV talk shows when we want to find out if a guests husband has been cheating on her with the babysitter, not when we want to find out the location of a bomb-making facility.

[Globeliner]

Used against suspected members...a bit hard to tell them what they want to know if you are innocent in the first place.

This is vile beyond words but apparently it is ok because the US Govt has defined this method of interrogation as not being torture.

I am sorry to see that the Thai Govt is involved although you have to wonder what pressure was put on them by the US and if they were aware of what was actually going on.

Once you start walking down the path of the ends justify the means you are in a moral black hole.

I hope the new Thai Govt makes it clear that no such facility will ever again be provided to the US.

Are you saying this is solely the fault of the'US'? What about the 'UK' and all other countries envolved? Please, let us know more.

[Gumballl]

Some of you people are unbelievable. Apparently many have a tough time here relating to the real victims of some of these terrorists acts.

Your evidence for this outrageous statement ? That some of us condemn torture or terrorism by whoever carries it out ? The terrorist-victim & tortured innocent-man are both equally victims of extreme injustice !

Believe it or not, we're all suffering here from mass bombings and future threats... We just want it stopped and want to get to the bottom of the acts.

Agreed - but this does not justify atrocities or torture, by either 'side'.

So.....if one of these guys for a fact is involved with or has knowledge of killing YOUR parent or child via one of many unthinkable acts (or one yet to come), you're going to worry about HIS rights?!?

How do you know he's involved for a fact ? Until it is proved, darned right I am concerned about physical-torture, of a potentially-innocent person. What if it's you who is mistakenly in the 'hot seat' ? Don't you want me to be against your being tortured ?

I don't think you'd just sit there and be easy on the guy. Or...then again maybe some of you would from some of what I've read here. How to win arguements - by slurring your opponents ?

We're talking about "waterboarding".....where the person believes he is drowning, but in a controlled environment. He thinks that death is imminent, so he talks (which is what we all want, right?). There is no physical damage.

Which fits the definition of torture quoted earlier.

What you're saying here, and I exagerate only slightly, is that torture is OK, because it's done by 'our' guys, who never make mistakes or get carried-away, and anyway they're probably all guilty.

If you simply want the the prisoner to talk, as I do too, can't you use drugs or a lie-detector, to find out the truth ? I suspect that there is an element of revenge here, which is totally wrong, because some of these people are later found to be innocent. I repeat the point which I made earlier - how would you apologise, to an innocent man, who you had just wrongly tortured ?

Let alone the likely result of false-confessions, misleading the anti-terrorist effort.

You make it seem that the CIA is going to a Muslim enclave and saying "eenie, meenie, minie, moe"... and then picking a random person out of the crowd. Trust me, that's not how it works.

The agency is intercepting communications, receiving tips from trusted/reliable informants, etc before declaring an individual a subject of interest.

Waterboarding is but one technique used to interrogate a detainee. A polygraph may be used to discern if someone is telling the truth (when providing information), but it cannot be used for "force" information out of someone, and it is not always a reliable tool anyways. Don't believe the nonsense you see on television concerning polygraph tests. With proper experience/training, a polygraph can easily be fooled. (If you strongly believe something to be true, even if it is a lie, then it is "true").

If I were to torture a person that was later found to be innocent, I would say "Sorry mate; no hard feelings right?"; then go on with my day. If my attitude appalls you, then so be it.

[moldy]

Some of you people are unbelievable. Apparently many have a tough time here relating to the real victims of some of these terrorists acts.

Your evidence for this outrageous statement ? That some of us condemn torture or terrorism by whoever carries it out ? The terrorist-victim & tortured innocent-man are both equally victims of extreme injustice !

Believe it or not, we're all suffering here from mass bombings and future threats... We just want it stopped and want to get to the bottom of the acts.

Agreed - but this does not justify atrocities or torture, by either 'side'.

So.....if one of these guys for a fact is involved with or has knowledge of killing YOUR parent or child via one of many unthinkable acts (or one yet to come), you're going to worry about HIS rights?!?

How do you know he's involved for a fact ? Until it is proved, darned right I am concerned about physical-torture, of a potentially-innocent person. What if it's you who is mistakenly in the 'hot seat' ? Don't you want me to be against your being tortured ?

I don't think you'd just sit there and be easy on the guy. Or...then again maybe some of you would from some of what I've read here. How to win arguements - by slurring your opponents ?

We're talking about "waterboarding".....where the person believes he is drowning, but in a controlled environment. He thinks that death is imminent, so he talks (which is what we all want, right?). There is no physical damage.

Which fits the definition of torture quoted earlier.

What you're saying here, and I exagerate only slightly, is that torture is OK, because it's done by 'our' guys, who never make mistakes or get carried-away, and anyway they're probably all guilty.

If you simply want the the prisoner to talk, as I do too, can't you use drugs or a lie-detector, to find out the truth ? I suspect that there is an element of revenge here, which is totally wrong, because some of these people are later found to be innocent. I repeat the point which I made earlier - how would you apologise, to an innocent man, who you had just wrongly tortured ?

Let alone the likely result of false-confessions, misleading the anti-terrorist effort.

You make it seem that the CIA is going to a Muslim enclave and saying "eenie, meenie, minie, moe"... and then picking a random person out of the crowd. Trust me, that's not how it works.

The agency is intercepting communications, receiving tips from trusted/reliable informants, etc before declaring an individual a subject of interest.

Waterboarding is but one technique used to interrogate a detainee. A polygraph may be used to discern if someone is telling the truth (when providing information), but it cannot be used for "force" information out of someone, and it is not always a reliable tool anyways. Don't believe the nonsense you see on television concerning polygraph tests. With proper experience/training, a polygraph can easily be fooled. (If you strongly believe something to be true, even if it is a lie, then it is "true").

If I were to torture a person that was later found to be innocent, I would say "Sorry mate; no hard feelings right?"; then go on with my day. If my attitude appalls you, then so be it.

Yes, I think that last comment is rather akin to lighting the blue touch paper and undermines your otherwise interesting and valid posting.

Sure, I for one don't want to be blown up by a terrorist bomb ( I came relatively close 3 times back in London) and hence have no particular sympathy for any terrorist, in a way I suppose it is rough justice. Plain madness too . I dare say had the terrorist been caught mob handed I'd have put a boot in given the opportunity such is the anger and fear of the moment. If push came to shove I'd pick up a gun to defend my country too as I'm a patriot. And you know what, yes under certain circumstances I might even actively torture someone myself who knows? war is such a terrible thing that envelopes us all. But there is a difference between honest defending, and provoking and antagonising attack, and torture is an altogether different ball game. The west goes looking for the fight in other words.

You see for me, we can't have it both ways, ie, come out tough but still hide behind sickly innocence and virtue, and I think this is what genuinely disgusts non westerners, and reading a lot of the postings you can see much of this in evidence.

Time nd time again we do see a major power acting out it's most awful twisted hang ups, and then standing back, saying looks it's them making us do it.

I'm not too happy about living in a world with views like yours in it either but it's as much your world as it is mine and all the other billions too. In a way both major players in the war are made for each other, just wish they would find some way of leaving the rest of us out of it.

The more I have to do with pain, the less I want to do with it, either as an aggressor or victim and this is maturity creeping in I think, perhaps just plain humanity /humility. Sure I may lose my rag have all sorts of angry feelings but that's simple human neurosis and existential pain, usually to do with an immediate concern, fear or stress. To carry it over in to an ethos however is something quite different.

I wonder if you really would 'go on with your day' if you were ever the victim.

[suricate]

Simulated drowning !!! . What's simulated about it? Did they just play a video game or something? Sick or what? Kind of makes you wonder who the enemies and terrorists really are

It's called waterboarding and is highly simulated. You trigger the targets reflexes of fear of drowning, nothing else. No physical damage is done.

Oh well that makes it alright then. Why not have a try out yourself then?

I believe he is answering a earlier post about what it is. He's not stating an opinion.

[Chloe82]

Simulated drowning !!! . What's simulated about it? Did they just play a video game or something? Sick or what? Kind of makes you wonder who the enemies and terrorists really are

It's called waterboarding and is highly simulated. You trigger the targets reflexes of fear of drowning, nothing else. No physical damage is done.

Of course there is physical damage done, the lungs are filled with water during the procedure, how could physical damage not be done?

Chloe.

[DavidLeeRoth]

Of course there is physical damage done, the lungs are filled with water during the procedure, how could physical damage not be done?

Hmmmm, because you aren't dying, and some water in your lungs doesn't cause physical injury or long term problems. Have you ever gone swimming as a child and sucked water into your nose or throat before? If so, are you still coping with the ill effects of that on a daily basis and collecting insurance money as you are physically unable to work?

[Supaporn]

As far as waterborading goes, it is torture. It causes an unbelievable amount of distress and is very difficult to breath. Water is continously poured over the person near to drowing or suffocation.

So does cutting off ones head.

Yeah but no one will say anything contra to that - it just wouldn't be politically correct. Better to slam the US, Britain, Aus or any other western country and ignore the others atrocities. Take a look and count up the comments. It is blatantly obvious.

[Ricardo]

Interesting set of responses.

That will always be the problem whatever you do there will be innocent people in harms way so I guess in the end it comes down to how many innocent people or collateral damage are you prepared to accept in the fight against terrorism, crime, drugs etc..

I accept accidental collateral-damage, just not intentional damage, to people who have not yet been proven guilty. When the pressure is on, to solve or prevent a crime, there is the temptation to trample on other people, in the rush. Arrest & questioning, polygraph or even drugs, are different to physical-torture, where the victim believes that they are dying. IMHO

Rubbish, sometimes you have to fight fire with fire, take the gloves off and level the playing field. Some of these people know no limits in their actions.

Two wrongs don't make a right, when alternatives exist, as they may here.

Good on Thailand if they did allow this on home soil, i believe the UK was accused of the exact same thing either last year or the year before.

I think it is true to say that these actions are illegal on US soil, hence the 'need' to carry them out elsewhere, in Cuba, UK or Thailand, or wherever. And I do welcome the eventual release from Cuba of some of those found to be innocent. It takes great courage to admit that you made a mistake.

We keep hearing islam is a religion of peace. And if you dare to criticize or make light of it, may you rest in peace.

Ditto Christianity as being peaceful in theory. Torture is used in many cultures, and parts of the world, not just one particular religion.

Chloe.

If you simply want the the prisoner to talk, as I do too, can't you use drugs or a lie-detector, to find out the truth ?

Hahaha, yeah right! We use lie-detector tests on TV talk shows when we want to find out if a guests husband has been cheating on her with the babysitter, not when we want to find out the location of a bomb-making facility.

So after over 50 years of use, the polygraph is now discredited because game-show hosts in a couple of countries use it, then how about drugs ? Surely more humane than torture ?

As far as waterborading goes, it is torture. It causes an unbelievable amount of distress and is very difficult to breath. Water is continously poured over the person near to drowing or suffocation.

So does cutting off ones head.

Yeah but no one will say anything contra to that - it just wouldn't be politically correct. Better to slam the US, Britain, Aus or any other western country and ignore the others atrocities. Take a look and count up the comments. It is blatantly obvious.

I believe my comments on torture apply equally in Burma, or Chile, or South Africa. People have minimum rights, one of which is not to be physically tortured, on the suspicion that they might know something useful. Especially when experience shows that mistakes can be made. If you don't stand up for the 'little guy', then one day it may be your turn, we're all part of some minority or another.

[ericB]

For those with a short memory, I will try to make you remenber something.

1983, Beyrouth, Lebanon. 2buildings full of soldiers (one with GI's, the other with french paratroopers) are blow by the terrorist.

Obviously noone can accept. Nor the military etablishment, nor the civilian. So action is taken by both countries (France and USA), but very different course of action.

The USA moved a battleship (the most powerfull at that time, the Missouri if I am not mistaken or her sister ship), firing shells on the Bekaa. The result being to scare the hel_l the civilian population of Beyrouth (the shells were pasing over the city), and killing both men (terrorist or not) women and children in the palestinian refugees camp. The only comment I heard at that time from US military being : or they are (terrorist) or they will be. Well Kill my mother and my little bro' and yes I will became a terrorist.

The french action less remarkable. A join intelligence operation with the lebanese security, 7 (seven) men indicted in the planning and the recruitment of the terrorist were identified, located. A small group of directly concerned french soldiers (let say from the same unit that suffered the bombing) was dispatched to deal with them. 3 of those bastards were officially contractors for the french army, so could be considered as traitors or person without honor , to comply with the usage in north africa they were simply bethroated, the 4 others died by the same way they used to kill (explosives).

So yes I do believe against chacals you need wolfs, but also any action must be caculated to deat the maximum damage with providing the biggest advantage. Let me say after that, and as everyone in Lebanon knew what happened and who did it , french army did not get any problem for long time.

Terrorist are simply human who lost the normal rules and follow wild rules. The best is to show them we can , if pushed, do the same (wild rules); but they must also understand the very best for everyone being them returning to the normal rules. Fear of a grduate, accurate, swift, harsh but mesurate answer to their criminal activity is the only way to make them take that step. Violence for violence give nothing, but simply attract more violence.

My humble 2 cents. Those prison are a disgrace to the human race, and people doing those tortures, people advocating for those torture, people finding pseudo justification to it are a disgrace to the human race; such were the totenkopft SS guarding Dachau, bergen Belsen or any other death camp during WWII. The difference btw those people and the youth who give their life for theior country (whatever the country is) is the very same the one btw those guardin of dachau and the german soldier who died on the front line. But maybe One should have been in war to understand that

Regards

[DavidLeeRoth]

So after over 50 years of use, the polygraph is now discredited because game-show hosts in a couple of countries use it, then how about drugs ? Surely more humane than torture ?

No, the polygraph is discredited because its often inconsistant, and easily cheatable. hel_l, you can go online and find instructions on how to pass one! Also, they are better suited to yes and no questions, not when trying to get detailed and truthful statements out of a suspect.

CIA - "Tell us where Bin Laden is hiding!"

Terrorist - "No"

I think the use of non-lethal "torture" techniques to get life saving information is absolutly warranted in these situations. We aren't dealing with good people, so why treat them that way? If we locked them away, fed them gourmet food and gave them satellite TV's, it wouldn't change how they treat our captives (beatings, rapes, beheadings, etc...), so no point in trying to kill them with kindness. Beat the shit out out them until they crack.

[PhilHarries]

Well said that man. A great point. Just play some rap music in his head for a few hours.

A FEW HOURS? Are you some kind of inhuman sadistic pervert? Exposure to ©rap music in excess of 30 nanoseconds is a gross violation of the basic human right to a peaceful death.

[Jai Dee]

CIA lawyer reaffirms torture jail did exist

Accusations that Thailand let the CIA set up a secret prison where the torture of al-Qaeda suspects took place resurfaced yesterday in closed testimony by the agency's top lawyer to US lawmakers.

The lawyer was describing the destruction of interrogation tapes.

The Washington Post reported the CIA station chief in Bangkok sent a classified cable in late 2005 asking permission to destroy the videotapes "recorded at a secret CIA prison in Thailand that in part portrayed intelligence officers using simulated drowning to extract information from suspected al-Qaeda members".

News about Thailand hosting a cell in the covert prison system set up by the CIA around 2001 was first reported by The Washington Post in November 2005.

Afghanistan and several countries in Eastern Europe, as well as a small centre at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, were also said to be part of the system.

Thailand was a spoke in the "hidden global internment network [that] is a central element in the CIA's unconventional war on terrorism. It depends on the cooperation of foreign intelligence services, and on keeping even basic information about the system secret from the public, foreign officials and nearly all members of Congress charged with overseeing the CIA's covert actions," the newspaper reported in its November 2, 2005 edition.

The report provoked an international outcry, but Bangkok denied the claim.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Tharit Charungvat dismissed the report, saying it was groundless.

"We have checked with all concerned security agencies and they have insisted that there was no such facility in Thailand," he said.

In the US capital, the CIA's acting general counsel John Rizzo testified behind closed doors as the first witness in what House intelligence committee officials have said will be a long investigation.

A senior committee member told reporters after the four-hour meeting that Rizzo said whoever gave the command to destroy the videotapes apparently acted against the direction of his superiors.

"It appears he hadn't got authority from anyone," Representative Pete Hoekstra, a Republican from Michigan, said.

Recorded on the tapes was the coercive questioning of two senior al-Qaeda suspects: Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, known as Abu Zubaida, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who were captured by US forces in 2002.

They show Zubaida undergoing "waterboarding", which involves strapping a prisoner to a board and then pouring water over his nose and mouth, creating the sensation of imminent drowning. Nashiri later also underwent the same treatment.

The US Justice Department and the House intelligence committee are now investigating whether that deed constituted a violation of law or an obstruction of justice.

"I believe there are parts of the intelligence community that don't believe they are accountable to Congress and may not be accountable to their own superiors in the intelligence community, and that's why it's a problem," he said.

At the centre of the controversy is Jose Rodriguez, who had been scheduled to appear before the committee on the same day. His testimony was delayed by a demand for immunity.

Rodriguez was the head of the CIA's National Clandestine Service, the branch that oversees spying operations and interrogations. He gave the order to destroy the tapes in November 2005.

The Post reported Rodriguez's attorney Robert Bennett as saying his client had consulted with CIA lawyers and officials who told him that he had the legal right to order the destruction of the tapes.

The Post said congressional investigators had turned up no evidence that anyone in the Bush administration openly advocated the tapes' destruction. The Post quoted Rodriguez's attorney as saying his client was carrying out the agency's stated intention.

"Since 2002, the CIA wanted to destroy the tapes to protect the identity and lives of its officers and for other counterintelligence reasons," Bennett said in a written response to questions from the newspaper.

"In 2003 the leadership of intelligence committees were told about the CIA's intent to destroy the tapes.

"In 2005, CIA lawyers again advised the National Clandestine Service that they had the authority to destroy the tapes and it was legal to do so.

"It is unfortunate that under the pressure of a congressional and criminal investigation, history is now being revised, and some people are running for cover."

Source: The Nation - 18 January 2008

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Well said that man. A great point. Just play some rap music in his head for a few hours.

A FEW HOURS? Are you some kind of inhuman sadistic pervert? Exposure to ©rap music in excess of 30 nanoseconds is a gross violation of the basic human right to a peaceful death.

ain't that the truth

[crowbait]

So after over 50 years of use, the polygraph is now discredited because game-show hosts in a couple of countries use it, then how about drugs ? Surely more humane than torture ?

No, the polygraph is discredited because its often inconsistant, and easily cheatable. hel_l, you can go online and find instructions on how to pass one! Also, they are better suited to yes and no questions, not when trying to get detailed and truthful statements out of a suspect.

CIA - "Tell us where Bin Laden is hiding!"

Terrorist - "No"

I think the use of non-lethal "torture" techniques to get life saving information is absolutly warranted in these situations. We aren't dealing with good people, so why treat them that way? If we locked them away, fed them gourmet food and gave them satellite TV's, it wouldn't change how they treat our captives (beatings, rapes, beheadings, etc...), so no point in trying to kill them with kindness. Beat the shit out out them until they crack.

YOUR RESPONSE AND THOSE OF THE OTHER THAT FIND TORTURE "JUSTIFIABLE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES" CHILLS MY VERY SOUL!!

I am ashamed to even speak the same language as you.........no nation has the right to inflict torture on an individual no matter what they have done, ever!

This was what we fought the second world war for. All the countries of the west have signed the Geneva Convention and all european countrie have a human rights act specifically forbidding torture.

I agree beheadings and bombings are barbaric but to respond by torturing suspects takes our vaunted western civilisation back to the level of Ghengis Khan and the mountains of skulls!

I blame the USA for this and I blame all those countries that supported the USA including my own and I very much fear that we will reap the whirlwind we have sown. I can't see how we can get back from this....................you cannot stop terrorism by repression, torture, war or violence...........surely we have learned that by now.........all you can do is get revenge, which leads to more terrorism, which leads to more revenge and so on.

To stop terrorism, you have to start talking and you can't get them to listen while ever you are torturing them.

[PhilHarries]

Sorry, but I am confused by the article.

Firstly the title says "Destroyed tapes show CIA prisons in Thailand". This is simply not possible, they may have showED CIA prisons but having been destroyED they can no longer SHOW them.

Secondly, apart from the early paragraph stating "a destroyED interrogation videotapes" all other references are to permission to destroy, command to destroy, order to destroy or legal right to destroy but nowhere does it say they have actually been destroyED.

So what is the script here? If they are still in existence then they should be submitted to the investigation, case closed. If they are not they are just one man's word against another, with one side no doubt already writing the book. But even so, how can we be sure any videotape was actually shot in Thailand unless they conveniently have the Grand Palace visible through the cell window.

CIA SECRET PRISONS

Destroyed tapes show CIA prisons in Thailand : Washington Post

The sticky issue of Thailand permitting the CIA to set up a secret prison where alleged torture of suspected al-Qaeda members were conducted surfaced again Thursday as the US lawmakers listen to the agency's top lawyer in a closed testimony about a destroyed interrogation videotapes.

Washington Post reported today that the CIA station chief in Bangkok sent a classified cable in late 2005, asking permission to destroy the videotapes " recorded at a secret CIA prison in Thailand that in part portrayed intelligence officers using simulated drowning to extract information from suspected al-Qaeda members."

The CIA official who gave the command to destroy the videotapes apparently acted against the direction of his superiors, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich told reporters after the four hours meeting. "It appears he hadn't gotten authority from anyone," Hoekstra said.

This bit is also convoluted. If he hadn't gotten ( ) authority this implies he didn't ask for it not necessarily that he was ordered to do otherwise but destroyed them anyway

Rodriguez was the head of the CIA's National Clandestine Service, the CIA branch that oversees spying operations and interrogations. He gave the order to destroy the tapes in November 2005.

Washington Post reported Rodriguez's attorney, Robert S. Bennett, as saying his client had consulted with CIA lawyers and officials who told him that he had the legal right to order the destruction of the tape.

Source: The Nation - 17 January 2008

[suricate]

Of course there is physical damage done, the lungs are filled with water during the procedure, how could physical damage not be done?

Hmmmm, because you aren't dying, and some water in your lungs doesn't cause physical injury or long term problems. Have you ever gone swimming as a child and sucked water into your nose or throat before? If so, are you still coping with the ill effects of that on a daily basis and collecting insurance money as you are physically unable to work?

From what I read in an article on how its done, and what happens, is that a person is held laying down and their whole head is head is wrapped in some type of clear plastic wrapping. The mouth is open for air to enter. Water is poured in the mouth . Its said that the mind and body interptes this as if the body is drowning. When in fact the person is not.

I haven't done any internet searches for the article, I'm sure it out there.

I have no desire to know any more about it then what I read in the new york times.

Edited January 18, 2008 by suricate