CIA made doctors torture suspected terrorists after 9/11, taskforce finds
Doctors were asked to torture detainees for intelligence gathering, and unethical practices continue, review
Sarah Boseley, health editor
The Guardian

LONDON: -- Doctors and psychologists working for the US military violated the ethical codes of their profession under instruction from the defence department and the CIA to become involved in the torture and degrading treatment of suspected terrorists, an investigation has concluded.

The report of the Taskforce on Preserving Medical Professionalism in National Security Detention Centres concludes that after 9/11, health professionals working with the military and intelligence services "designed and participated in cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment and torture of detainees".

Medical professionals were in effect told that their ethical mantra "first do no harm" did not apply, because they were not treating people who were ill.

The report lays blame primarily on the defence department (DoD) and the CIA, which required their healthcare staff to put aside any scruples in the interests of intelligence gathering and security practices that caused severe harm to detainees, from waterboarding to sleep deprivation and force-feeding. [read more...]

Full story: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/04/cia-doctors-torture-suspected-terrorists-9-11

-- The Guardian 2013-11-05

My sweet dear Uncle would never do that?

The sun is sinking in the West.

It's gotta be true---it's from The Guardian

... and your point is?

Do people just get bored and dream up stuff to blame US?

"Medical professionals were in effect told that their ethical mantra "first do no harm" did not apply, because they were not treating people who were ill." OMG... how twisted can they get? Was this defense used by Nazi doctors at Nuremburg trials? I imagine quite a few were ill after being under doctors "care", mentally if not physically. I wish it were unbelievable...

Do people just get bored and dream up stuff to blame US?

There is enough of the true stuff so nothing needs to be made up!

Off topic posts and inflammatory replies have been removed.

Do people just get bored and dream up stuff to blame US?

Well the suspension of medical ethics is about as serious as it can get.

Off-topic post deleted.

I'm not surprised - considering the insanity that reigns supreme around my government job.

Their licence to practice medicine should be revoked for life.

They should be imprisoned for life,

along with G.W. Bush and the rest of the Chaney administration.

Perhaps the medical establishment should explain in more explicit terms what the oath means.

Personally, I think this is a tempest in a teapot. For example, courts have mandated that people be fed against their will and when the court orders something to be done, it's done.

The Guardian might want to turn its attention to the many, many countries in which prisoners are denied any type of medical treatment.

Is this really a surprise to anyone? Are there any countries that don't use similar tactics during wartime?

I'm just asking a few questions here...

Has anybody ever died as a result of waterboarding?

Has anybody ever died as a result of sleep deprivation?

Since the only reason for force feeding anybody would be if they had refused to eat, has anybody ever died from force feeding?

This report was done by a group calling themselves the "Taskforce on Preserving Medical Professionalism in National Security Detention Centres". This taskforce is a part of a larger organization named "The Institute on Medicine as a Profession".

http://www.imapny.org/about_imap/mission--history

Digging into the source of funding for this organization, one finds at least one rather interesting piece of information:

"The Institute on Medicine as a Profession was founded in 2003 with a grant of $7.5 million from George Soros and the Open Society Institute (OSI). Neither Open Society Institute, nor any business associated with George Soros is represented on the IMAP board of directors."

From this link: http://www.imapny.org/about_imap/funding_information

For your information, George Soros spent millions of his own money to try and defeat Bush in both his Presidential elections. Any report on the Bush administration from a Soros sponsored organization is met, by me and many others, with a healthy does of scepticism.

Up to you, as the old saying goes.

Is this really a surprise to anyone? Are there any countries that don't use similar tactics during wartime?

There are many countries that do not legalise the use of torture during wartime

Perhaps the medical establishment should explain in more explicit terms what the oath means.

Personally, I think this is a tempest in a teapot. For example, courts have mandated that people be fed against their will and when the court orders something to be done, it's done.

The Guardian might want to turn its attention to the many, many countries in which prisoners are denied any type of medical treatment.

It's a lot deeper issue than force feeding, it's more to do with legalising the practice of torturing detainees & utilising the services of medical professionals.

Your comment regarding the Guardian is somewhat absurd. The Guardian is covering a report researched & published by an independent North American medical organisation whose Board is mainly comprised of very senior people in the US medical profession e.g. David J. Rothman is Bernard Schoenberg Professor of Social Medicine at Columbia College of Physicians & Surgeons, Professor of History, Columbia University, and President of the Institute on Medicine as a Profession.

The newspaper has covered & reported upon many, many countries where human rights abuses are rampant.

This topic is about Dr.'s participating in torture and I think it is misleading. Health professionals, as well as most professionals with a code of ethics, know the code and can apply it. Neither the DOD nor the CIA can instruct or make them do something that is afoul of the code. This is one of the main reasons that medical professionals will not participate in executions. Whether they agree or not, it is against the ethical code.

Someone, somewhere is trying to split hairs.

Chuckd: Some of your questions are probably best not answered, since somewhere someone probably has died of waterboarding and while being force fed. The point with forced feeding is that without they would die.

Leaving morality aside, isn't it safer to have doctors and nurses involved in torture, as opposed to lower level grunts who don't have a clue about medical safety? Just saying....

Well, that's it for me. I don't care what my Obamacare plan says, I will not go to Gitmo for medical treatment if the Drs. have questionable ethics.

Is this really a surprise to anyone? Are there any countries that don't use similar tactics during wartime?

There are many countries that do not legalise the use of torture during wartime

Maybe, but most of them do it anyway.

Is this really a surprise to anyone? Are there any countries that don't use similar tactics during wartime?

There are many countries that do not legalise the use of torture during wartime

Maybe, but most of them do it anyway.

Yeah, water boarding sucks, but definitely not as savage as cutting body parts off, beheading and burning people alive in 55 gallon drums or other preferred methods of torture utilized by those that US water boarded.

Is this really a surprise to anyone? Are there any countries that don't use similar tactics during wartime?

There are many countries that do not legalise the use of torture during wartime

Maybe, but most of them do it anyway.

Yeah, water boarding sucks, but definitely not as savage as cutting body parts off, beheading and burning people alive in 55 gallon drums or other preferred methods of torture utilized by those that US water boarded.

it is always said water boarding gives you the feel to drown. Which is a bit wrong, in fact you really don't get air, just you don't drown, if they don't stop you suffocate and that happened. So it is at the same level as putting someones head under water till he speaks or put a plastic bag over his head.

For middle age it is a mild form of torture....

Waterboarding was used on only three high-value terrorists. Why lose any sleep about it.

Waterboarding was used on only three high-value terrorists. Why lose any sleep about it.

Maybe so, but those renditioned by the CIA to places such as Egypt would have experienced more rigorous torture. An extensive review of the legitimacy of the use of torture in the War on Terrorism is at:

http://issuu.com/isobserver/docs/holzinger-torture_in_the_war_on_terror_holzinger/5?e=4454195/2435545

Leaving morality aside, isn't it safer to have doctors and nurses involved in torture, as opposed to lower level grunts who don't have a clue about medical safety? Just saying....

Getting tortured by doctors? Sheer luxury!

Waterboarding was used on only three high-value terrorists. Why lose any sleep about it.

If that's factual then it would mean waterboarding was used in a carefully limited way and according to certain very specific standards and criteria against a deliberatively selected few more than dubious individuals who had valuable knowledge and information after the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York City and in Washington.

Had the medical personnel involved not been a part of the US military forces I'd be greatly concerned. In this instance, however, given the time and the circumstance, I haven't lost any sleep over it nor will I. For sure I don't like it, but I don't like a lot of things, to include another massive terrorist attack against the United States in the United States.

Another dislike I have is of George Bush so I'm relieved that Prez Obama officially ended the limited practice almost immediately on assuming office in 2009. The Bush administration anyway used waterboarding sparingly, perhaps prudently.

We'll see whether the medical profession is moved to do anything concerning the medical personnel involved. It's certainly true there haven't been any medical profession repercussions to date. Whether the report so long after the events causes anything remains to be seen.

I think it's related that the other day the US Supreme Court refused to accept a case accusing former SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld of torture. The appeals court ruling thus stands that Rumsfeld is not guilty of the specific case of torture brought against him. For the record, I don't like Rumsfeld either, but if the judiciary says he's not guilty I guess I'll have to go with that too.

We fight against the enemy because the enemy has no morals.

To fight the enemy efficiently, we have to drop our own morals.

Eeuuuhhh???

We fight against the enemy because the enemy has no morals.

To fight the enemy efficiently, we have to drop our own morals.

Eeuuuhhh???

Dropping morals is objectionable enough, but one should drop a name to go with the quote.