Retired officers talk torture
Group pushes for clarification of U.S. interrogation policies
By Tony Bartelme
At first, it seemed like an intelligence jackpot. Months after 9/11, Pakistani forces captured Ibn al-Libi, leader of an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan.
Pakistani officials turned al-Libi over to U.S. forces, and FBI and Army operatives went to work.
"They were playing by the book," said David Irvine, a retired Army brigadier general and part of a group of more than 40 retired military leaders concerned about the Bush administration's stance toward interrogations.
But then CIA operatives intervened, and al-Libi soon was at the center of a government tug-of-war over who would handle him. The issue went to the White House, and the CIA won the job. Agents sent al-Libi to Egypt. After being tortured, al-Libi said that Iraq was working with al-Qaida to make weapons of mass destruction.
Al-Libi's torture-induced confession would become one of the prime justifications for the war in Iraq. But al-Libi eventually recanted his story. "He only said what he said to save his life," Irvine said. The widely documented al-Libi case is "a fine example of how torture leads to unreliable information."
Irvine, who among other things, taught interrogation techniques, and three other generals and admirals were in Charleston on Monday as part of a larger push to clarify the nation's approach to terrorism interrogations.
"It's a defining issue," retired Vice Adm. Lee Gunn said.
Their visit comes a month after U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., blocked a House bill outlawing waterboarding and holding the CIA to interrogation tactics in an Army field manual.
Graham, who has taken strong stands against waterboarding, nevertheless said the new law would hamper the CIA's interrogations. In a statement, he said he had been briefed on the current CIA program. "It is aggressive, effective, lawful and in compliance with our legal obligations."
But another member of the retired officers' group, Army Brig. Gen. James Cullen, said the international community isn't ready to trust Graham's word — not after Abu Ghraib and other stories of prisoner mistreatment.
During a meeting with The Post and Courier's editorial board, he and others in the group said the nation needs a clear policy on torture and that the CIA shouldn't be allowed to operate under different rules than the military.
Human Rights First helped organize the retired military officers. But the officers aren't a bunch of peaceniks. Members include Paul Kern, a retired general who led the military's investigation into Abu Ghraib, and Stansfield Turner, a retired admiral and former CIA director.
The group's main goal is to educate presidential candidates that "torture is wrong, inefficient, unnecessary and damaging to our national security," said Gunn, a former Navy inspector general.
Gunn said that studies have long proven that torture doesn't elicit reliable information.
It also can have serious effects on the interrogators themselves, said retired Brig. Gen. Stephen Xenakis. "During the let-down, the questions come back," he said. If the definitions under which they were operating aren't clear, this second-guessing can lead to emotional trauma.
The officers said they were concerned about how the popular TV show "24" depicts torture. The main character, Jack Bauer, frequently uses torture to get information within seconds. Gunn said the show's values are filtering into the battlefield, creating ambiguity where clarity is needed most.
Reach Tony Bartelme at tbartelme@postandcourier.com or 937-5554.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly versionComments
moonpie (anonymous) says...
Lets see we might have tortured an islamic militant? SO WHAT! Lets do to them what they do to us. The world has changed and this IS NOT a conventional war that the rules of the Geneva convention were intended for way back when. New rules need to be written; rule one - do to militants what they do to you?
Remember the headless poeple in orange jump suits? You spinless panty weights!
January 15, 2008 at 6:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
majorjohnson (anonymous) says...
lol...panty weights?
Since when did you concern yourself with the constitution JohnQ? So far the only denial of habeas corpus was Jose Padilla, which I disagreed with. The people in Gitmo are not American citizens or legal residents so the constitution of the United States doesn't apply to them, nor do they fall under the terms of the Geneva Convention.
You're part of the crowd that would replace the constitution with the communist manifesto, just like Hillary. Go back to listening to airhead amerika.
January 15, 2008 at 6:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
5thGenerationLocal (anonymous) says...
What we need to do is stop listening to lawyers and businessmen on the hill who have never been involved in a tactical situation yet get to make tactical decisions. Real time information is key, yet having to slow the information gathering process to ask for "permission to proceed" is the norm. I think that our brave men and women who are fighting overseas are the real professionals. If they need to threaten, or even cut off a mans testicles, lop off a finger and waterboard someone to get information, go for it. These terrorists know no rules. They do not live by a doctrine. They are not members of the Geneva Convention. Just my .02
January 15, 2008 at 7:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
carlosthedwarf (anonymous) says...
I agree that we should shut down Gitmo and stop torturing terrorists. Instead, I propose that we put a bullet in each of their heads after we capture them. The only good terrorist is a dead one. If these bastards want to go see Allah so bad along with the 72 virgins, I say that we can be the genie and send Aladdin on his magic carpet ride to a whole new world.
January 15, 2008 at 8:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
carlosthedwarf (anonymous) says...
Seriously, I don't understand how so many people in this country can be so ass-backwards when it comes to our military. They say that they "support the troops" yet they spend 24/7 telling people how our troops torture and kill innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those brave men and women over there are risking their lives, often giving their lives, for these people in America who spend most of their time bashing our military.
Truth be told, Guantanamo should not be shut down. I don't need a lecture from guilty liberals on torture. How come I never hear these people condemning al-Qaeda's torturing and murdering of hostages? The silence is deafening.
January 15, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blah_blah_blah (anonymous) says...
The POINT of the article:
"Gunn said that studies have long proven that torture doesn't elicit reliable information."
"He only said what he said to save his life," Irvine said. The widely documented al-Libi case is "a fine example of how torture leads to unreliable information."
After 5 years, billions of dollars, and with the strongest, bravest men and women in the world, how come we haven't "defeated" bin Laden and the terrorists? Maybe it is time to Support The Troops and Keep America Safe, by sending them into the right areas with reliable information.
January 15, 2008 at 9:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
majorjohnson (anonymous) says...
Don't you folks know that only Americans torture and maim. When Al-Quaida uses drills, blow torches and beheadings it's only because the nasty Americans drove them to it by making those guys in abu graib wear panties on their heads. Those aren't terrorists to the liberals, they are freedom fighters.
January 15, 2008 at 9:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
shoebaby77 (anonymous) says...
tripsa wrote: "oh, and torture the little murders till they talk, save some lives - American lives."
I would think that adding fuel to the fire, so to speak, would put our troops in an even more dangerous situation than they are already in. We would only be promoting that when they capture American POW's they should do the same thing, torture. You having been in the military should be aware of this, or at least I would think so.
January 15, 2008 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Test2007 (anonymous) says...
Anyone who is trying indulge people with some common sense. This ain't the place buddy. This a place of opinion, discord and arguing but rarely common sense. We post not to convince someone that what they believe is wrong (my opinion on issues hasn't been changed at all by a p&c board ever) but to get our thoughts out.
Most people are only willing to accept torture if it is against someone they despise. Family in US gets bound and tortured and we're horrified but so-called "terrorist" get tortured and we're happy. Why? Because they "think" they're terrorists? Personally I do think this kind of thing incites the lunatics but we don't really care. We should though. These nuts aren't scared to die.
POW is not the same as a detainee. Sorry no deal.
Majorjohnson - Everyone knows that Al Qaeda is horrible and they torture and behead even their own people. So why the hell are we comparing ourselves to them. I don't know about you but I am better than that. Sorry. I can't compare myself with Al Qaeda but maybe you can.
Moonpie - what did they do to us? You mean bin laden, the hijackers?? Because I happen to know that the majority of those responsible for 9/11 came from Saudia Arabia and last I heard our president is over there at this moment making nice.
PS - hmm still haven't found bin laden YET but that could be because most of our forces aren't even in the same country as him.
January 15, 2008 at 11:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nich19699 (anonymous) says...
I am a nonsmoker as well. As many of you have said, If I go to someplace and they allow smoking i go someplace else where they are not. It's to eaches own. We are all grown folks. The Problem with this state is its just backwords. They want to tell how to live. Next they want to pass a law that tells you when to poop.
January 15, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Test2007 (anonymous) says...
I think it is nuts that they didn't report it until after BUT I thought I heard some ex-military in here.
What do you think would happen had they tried that crap while still active? Umm, retribution anyone? I hate to say it b/c I have lots of family members who are veterans including my Dad, but that is the culture. Women and me are afraid to report assaults (sexual or otherwise) for fear of retribution.
Not even physical retribution. Sorry, I can't say that I blame him though. He probably didn't want to lose the big pay day he got when he left.
January 15, 2008 at 12:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
5thGenerationLocal (anonymous) says...
Torture is having to make an operational decision is seconds and then having to wonder what slimy assed lawyer is going to try and fry your ass for doing your job once you get back to the good ole USofA.
I made it home alive. Am I going to have to go to jail and not see my wife and kids for years because someone without any operational experience said what I did was wrong?
That is torture.
January 15, 2008 at 2:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JRob (anonymous) says...
Hate to tell you but Lindsay Graham aint losing to any of the no names who say they're running for his seat.
As a signatory to the Geneva Conventions, the US is not permitted to torture. Perhaps we should withdraw and not be bound by these "quaint" rules. The problem (other than things like honor and decency), as others have suggested, will come when US forces are captured.
January 15, 2008 at 2:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pinckney (anonymous) says...
If active duty military officers speak out against current policy most of this P&C board will brand them as traitors. If they wait until retirement they are spineless hypocrites - and traitors and lobbyists. Clearly, there is no time they can speak out that their opinions will be respected on this board unless it agrees with the more vocal and right tilted posters. Does it really seem like a good idea for active duty military to speak out publicly and criticise current policy? Isn't that mutiny?
January 15, 2008 at 5:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
outrage (anonymous) says...
I still have not agreed with JohnQ on anything. Can someone tell what websites he reads? He scares me!
January 15, 2008 at 5:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
moonpie (anonymous) says...
Posted by JohnQ
(Early) "Do you have sympathy for our troops that are captured in the future? If it is alright for us to do it don't you think the same thing will happen to our troops in the future"
What freaking liberal rock to you live under man? Are they NOT ALREADY doing this?! Please take the liberal Bush hating binders off for a minute. If you have never seen an american troop dragged thru a city in some islamic terrorist country, I'll kiss you liberal rear and give you a week to gather the crowd! Is that part of the Geneva convention rules? Cause maybe I missed that part??
Come on JohnQ your usually funny but now your pissing me off.
January 15, 2008 at 6:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
outrage (anonymous) says...
moonpie - JohnQ sounds a little bit like Alan Colmes, what say you?
January 15, 2008 at 6:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
moonpie (anonymous) says...
alan colmes,nader,mahr,franken,murtha,any kennedy, I'm talikng stupidly extreme. Irrationaly extreme.
January 15, 2008 at 8 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
