Waterboarding: two questions for Michael Hayden about three “high-value” detainees now in Guantánamo
6.2.08
The media is buzzing with the news that Michael Hayden, the director of the CIA, admitted in an open session of Congress yesterday that waterboarding –- a long-reviled torture technique, which produces the perception of drowning –- was used on three “high-value” al-Qaeda suspects in CIA custody in 2002 and 2003. The three men –- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abdul Rahim al-Nashiri –- are discussed in my book The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison.
The three “high-value” detainees whom Michael Hayden admitted were waterboarded by the CIA. From L to R: Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abdul Rahim al-Nashiri.
My questions for Mr. Hayden are simple. Firstly, if it’s true that only three detainees were subjected to waterboarding, then why did a number of “former and current intelligence officers and supervisors” tell ABC News in November 2005 that “a dozen top al-Qaeda targets incarcerated in isolation at secret locations on military bases in regions from Asia to Eastern Europe” were subjected to six “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques,” instituted in mid-March 2002?
According to the ABC News account, the six techniques used by the CIA on the “dozen top al-Qaeda targets” were “The Attention Grab,” “Attention Slap,” “The Belly Slap” and three other techniques that are particularly worrying: “Long Time Standing,” “The Cold Cell,” and, of course, “Waterboarding.”
“Long Time Standing” was described as “among the most effective [techniques],” in which prisoners “are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours.” The ABC News report added, “Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.” In “The Cold Cell,” the prisoner “is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.”
The description of “Waterboarding” was as follows: “The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner’s face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.”
The article proceeded with recollections of the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who apparently “won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess” (the interrogators tried it on themselves, but “only lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in”).
According to the ABC News report, one other detainee who was waterboarded was Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, the director of the Khaldan training camp in Afghanistan, who was captured in November 2001. His current whereabouts are unknown, although there are suspicions that he was finally delivered to the Libyan government. Having slipped off the radar, the government clearly does not want his case revived, not only because it may have to explain what has happened to him, but also because, as a result of the application of “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques,” al-Libi claimed that Saddam Hussein had offered to train two al-Qaeda operatives in the use of chemical and biological weapons.
Al-Libi’s “confession” led to President Bush declaring, in October 2002, “Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and gases,” and his claims were, notoriously, included in Colin Powell’s speech to the UN Security Council on February 5, 2003. The claims were of course, groundless, and were recanted by al-Libi in January 2004, but it took Dan Cloonan, a veteran FBI interrogator, who was resolutely opposed to the use of torture, to explain why they should never have been believed in the first place. Cloonan told Jane Mayer, “It was ridiculous for interrogators to think Libi would have known anything about Iraq … The reason they got bad information is that they beat it out of him. You never get good information from someone that way.”
My second question for Mr. Hayden concerns an allegation made by Murat Kurnaz, the German detainee who was released from Guantánamo in August 2006. In an article in the Washington Spectator last July, focusing on Kurnaz’s story, as described in his book Fünf Jahre Meines Lebens: Ein Bericht Aus Guantánamo (Five Years Of My Life: A Report From Guantánamo), the following passage came after Kurnaz’s recollections of being hung by his wrists for “hours and days,” interrupted only by a doctor who came to “check his vital signs to determine if he could withstand more enhanced interrogation,” and his recollections of seeing, in the neighboring cell, another detainee who had died as a result of this ordeal:
“Kurnaz said he was also subjected to waterboarding and electric shock. And that beatings were routine and constant. He theorizes that much of the torture was a result of the failure of the American soldiers and agents to capture any real terrorists in the initial sweeps. (He was told that he was sold to the Americans for $3,000 by Pakistani police, who identified him as a terrorist). ‘They didn’t have any big fish. And they thought that by torture they could get one of us to say something. “I know Osama” or something like that. Then they could say they had a big fish.’”
In light of the comments made by CIA sources in November 2005, and by Murat Kurnaz in his book, I can only wonder how it’s feasible for Mr. Hayden to assert that the use of waterboarding was restricted to three of the 14 “high-value” detainees who were transferred to Guantánamo in September 2006, and, by extension, to claim that waterboarding was not used elsewhere in the “War on Terror” prisons; specifically, as Murat Kurnaz alleged, in one of the US prisons in Afghanistan, which, with Guantánamo, provided the template for the well-chronicled riot of torture and abuse that later migrated to Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
As published on the Huffington Post, AlterNet, Anti-war.com and CounterPunch.
3 Responses
Tom Paine says...
Now that George Bush and Michael Hayden have publicly confessed to government waterboarding in a press conference on February 6, 2008, and in testimony before Congress on February 5, 2008, you may find the following information useful:
The law review article referenced below (available at no cost at: http://www.law.utah.edu/_webfiles/ULRarticles/150/150.pdf ) makes clear that waterboarding is torture and is a crime and a war crime punishable under a number of treaties to which the United States is a party and several U.S. statutes.
The article also explains that there is no defense available due to either (1) prior legal advice, or (2) circumstances (including, without limitation, terrorist acts – see citations in Footnotes 21 and 25 in the article), contrary to the claims of Bush and Hayden.
The law review article (see pages 359 to 374) also establishes that under a number of treaties to which the United States is a party, the U.S. has an obligation to initiate an official investigation regarding confessed acts of torture. For example, the 1984 U.N. Convention Against Torture, (1465 UNTS 85), Article 12 reads as follows:
“Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction.” (NOTE: The article also explains why “territory under its jurisdiction” includes GITMO and all DOD and CIA secret detention sites for the United States.)
The following case, among others, has held that waterboarding is torture:
In re Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation, 910 F. Supp. 1460, 1463 (District of Hawaii, 1995)
Waterboarding is torture regardless of the surrounding circumstances – there is no circumstantial or necessity defense to torture claims.
It is time for the appointment of a special prosecutor – General Mukasey must recuse himself because of his refusal to publicly state that waterboarding is criminal torture. As explained in the law review article and elsewhere, the following individuals played primary roles in the authorization of waterboarding and should be immediately identified as the primary subjects of the investigation:
George W. Bush
Richard “Dick” Cheney
John Ashcroft
Alberto Gonzales
Donald Rumsfeld
George J. Tenet
John E. McLaughlin
Porter Goss
David Addington
Jay S. Bybee
John Yoo
Jack Goldsmith
General Ricardo Sanchez
General Geoffrey Miller
General Janis Karpinski
Bush/Cheney Pardon Calendar
Under the circumstances – a public confession of criminal acts by George W. Bush — you should expect that immediately after the November elections George W. Bush will pardon all of the people listed above, then resign. At that point, Richard “Dick” Cheney would become President, and you should expect that in that capacity Cheney will immediately pardon George W. Bush.
Immediate Appointment of Special Prosecutor
As a result of the expected pardons, a special prosecutor should be appointed immediately
Commencement of Impeachment Proceedings
As a result of the expected pardons, on the day after the November elections, the House of Representatives should impeach George W. Bush and Richard “Dick” Cheney for high crimes — torture — violating the following statutes, among others:
18 USC 3231
18 USC Sections 2340-2340A
18 USC 2441
Please note the strategic importance of simply presenting the impeachment to members of the House with no hearings and an immediate vote on the day after the November elections. There is no reason for hearings or delay, since George W. Bush has admitted the criminal act that is the basis of the impeachment.
International Crimes Not Subject to Pardon Power
It is worth pointing out that torture violations of the Law of War and international treaties are not subject to the Presidential pardon power. We will see these individuals on trial in the Hague for their publicly confessed war crimes.
“Above the Law: Unlawful Executive Authorizations Regarding Detainee Treatment, Secret Renditions, Domestic Spying and Claims to Unchecked Executive Power,” Jordan J. Paust, Utah Law Review, 2007, Number 2, Pages 345 to 419
Article available free at: http://www.law.utah.edu/_webfiles/ULRarticles/150/150.pdf
...on February 7th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
True Blue Liberal » Waterboarding: Two Questions For Michael Hayden About Three “High-Value” Detainees Now In Guantánamo says...
[...] Read more Waterboarding [...]
...on February 7th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Andy Worthington says...
After this article was published, I received the following comment. I’ve been asked to post it anonymously.
“Did I ever tell you my taste of routine from a USN Seal? I spent a short time in the reserves and had to go to boot camp. We had to either show we could swim or fake it across the width of a regulation swimming pool. To this day I cannot swim but I was doing my best to get across somehow. It was not going very well but I kept trying that day. Once before I managed to ‘fake it’ successfully, I had managed to get a couple of yards across when I felt my head being pushed under water. Of course I panicked and stood up (we were not on the deep end so that it was possible to touch the bottom of the pool). Our instructor (the swimming instructors are all Navy divers) yelled at me for not swimming across as required.
“When I had finally managed to get through and training was over for the day, I had time to think about this in the barracks. Some years later I was doing research on Brazil and read the study on Torture in Brazil under the military. Suddenly 1+1 equaled 2. This guy was ready to hold my head under water because I did not swim. At the end of the day he would go home like all the other instructors. If he had met me in an interrogation room (as a petty officer with an elite MOS, not impossible), why should he hesitate to use water treatment. It scares the shit out of people. When I was three years old I was pushed into a swimming pool and could not swim. The certainly brief time before my mother jumped in to pull me out seemed like an eternity. I had nightmares for nearly fifteen years after.
“What I am getting at is that the military is a torture machine which is like a motor idling until someone presses the accelerator. Everywhere there are people with varying degrees of skill and willingness to perform these tasks when someone pulls the throttle. All of these denials and qualifications from official and semi-official sources are just red herrings. If one starts talking about prohibiting torture in the military then one has to call the whole military training structure into question (e.g. the training of US Marines).”
...on February 9th, 2008 at 2:20 pm