Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Waterboarded 183 Times One Month
Or so says liberal blogger EmptyWheel at least:
According to the May 30, 2005 Bradbury memo, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003 and Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002.
On page 37 of the OLC memo, in a passage discussing the differences between SERE techniques and the torture used with detainees, the memo explains:
The CIA used the waterboard “at least 83 times during August 2002″ in the interrogation of Zubaydah. IG Report at 90, and 183 times during March 2003 in the interrogation of KSM, see id. at 91.
Note, the information comes from the CIA IG report which, in the case of Abu Zubaydah, is based on having viewed the torture tapes as well as other materials. So this is presumably a number that was once backed up by video evidence.
Yeah, that is pretty sickening. And not only for those who, like me, believe that waterboarding constitutes torture. Even if you believe it does not, undergoing this treatment 183 times in one month is extreme.
None of us have any sympathy for Zubaydah and KSM, but waterboarding them 83 and 183 times respectively in just one month time is absolutely unacceptable. A country loses its soul when it tortures its enemies.
Terrible news.
Having said that, Obama was wise to say nobody would be prosecuted for condoning / ordering / practicing torture. This was a terrible mistake, it should never have happened, but there is no need to start a major witch hunt. Let it be burried in the past.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
That seems to confirm what that former Bush official said recently (I can’t recall her name) about the problem being the frequency of the actions. I believe she was saying that a lot of the interrogation techniques taken alone were not torture in her opinion, but the way they were applied in combination and frequency reached that threshold.
So I don’t know if the details are correct here but I’m more than willing to concede the jist of the argument.
“That seems to confirm what that former Bush official said recently (I can’t recall her name) about the problem being the frequency of the actions. I believe she was saying that a lot of the interrogation techniques taken alone were not torture in her opinion, but the way they were applied in combination and frequency reached that threshold.”
I think that’s a strong argument to make, actually. Even if you believe that waterboarding in itself is not torture, doing it 183 times in one month, well, I think most will agree that this is if not torture than at least unacceptable.
“This was a terrible mistake, it should never have happened, but there is no need to start a major witch hunt.”
Witches were inventions and shibboleths used as scapegoats – these are real problematic elements whose evasion of justice increases the chances this will happen again. You said America has lost its soul, but there is an opportunity to ameliorate and make the most of the situation rather than just sweep it all under the rug. Prosecution may not change much in the metaphysical sense or in the practical, mundane aspect of things, but it is important for the future. Whether you choose principles or pragmatism, a patient but unrelenting reaction to these cowardly acts are good prioritizing.
Michael: Yes, particularly since the legal definition of torture in the statutes refers several times to the duration of the distress that’s elicited. Seems like any argument to the contrary then would definitely be an overly legalistic parsing to try to stick to letter of the law but not the spirit of it.
If, as many have written, torture does not gain substantial info then one can only assume that the “interrogators” were simply meting out punishment.
And if I may, here’s a clear declaration of the “wrongness” of torture from an (?) unlikely source. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/february/23.32.html
This got so little discussion in the blogosphere. I guess because it didn’t fit the meme of conservative Christian as right-wind sycophant.
c3- I admit I haven’t read the primary source material but I’m wondering if we really know whether any valid information was being given up during those episodes? I mean, John Cole has a post up saying, why didn’t someone come to the conclusion after the 180th time that this wasn’t working- but I’m wondering if that’s really the case or if it was precisely because they did get some actionable intelligence during some of the episodes that they kept going. Does anyone know the answer to that?
I still say it was morally unjustifiable, I’m just wondering if that line of reasoning really holds or was it a case where the interrogators were led to repeating the act because it was working in that case, rather than the other conclusion that they had to have known it was ineffective but kept doing it anyway for retribution.
“This was a terrible mistake”
It was no mistake. It was premeditated, carefully rationalized and deliberately smothered in secrecy claims.
“but there is no need to start a major witch hunt. Let it be burried in the past.”
Just like the Nuremberg Court decided to do with those who ordered/condoned by legal legerdemain/practised torture. Oh wait…
No, Obama is simply wrong.
Gotta love those lefty mind-reading powers! It’s like you are superheroes or something!
Looky! Yet another Hitler reference from Newshoggers! How surprising!
We are so fortunate that left-wing dictatorships have never engaged in torture or that left-wing officials have never tried to abridge Americans’ civil rights for political convenience. Oh. Wait. Stalin. And campus speech codes. Of course, anyone who only read Newshoggers would never know that these even existed, right, Cernig?
I wanted to see the IG report first before posting on this, but couldn’t find it. Not only is 183 times gross, it also appears to violate the allowances set out in the same set of memos, which call for no more than 12 times in a five day period (out of 30 days).
12×5 = 60
Even if you agree with that many times being allowable, they still broke their own rules, perhaps a US law, and also perhaps an international treaty of which we are bound. See my post below for more on that.
It seems to me that if the CIA did this to the guy 183 times in one month, it couldn’t really be that bad. Basically 6 times a day. I sure don’t feel sorry for the guy. All he had to do was give up some actionable intel. Actually all he had to do was decide not to be an life-hating terrorist.
I don’t think anyone here feels sorry for KSM. I certainly don’t. He had it coming to him. That doesn’t mean that makes it right.
“Actually all he had to do was decide not to be an life-hating terrorist.”
In that case, lets also waterboard domestic murderers 183 times in a month.
“Or so says liberal blogger EmptyWheel at least”
Actually this info does appear on page 37 of the OLC memo where she provided the link, so it’s not “just according to emptywheel”, it’s also according to Bradbury.
By the way I’m glad that you posted a link to emptywheel’s piece. She has done a number of really detailed posts on the memos that are quite good. There are also a number of attorneys who post at that site who sometimes give additional info in the comments section of her posts that are very insightful, as well. I’d encourage people who really want to know about this issue to read her blog for these pieces. Most of them have links where you can read the original material for yourself and come to your own conclusion.
I think reading the ICRC report and the memos provides very powerful evidence that we had a program of torture. And this is really only the tip of the iceburg. There are government documents online that show detainees who were tortured to death (in addition to the many deaths listed as heart attack, some were actually listed by the govt. themselves as homicides). One prisoner was beaten so bad on his legs that the autopsy showed that his legs had been pulpified. And there are still detainee’s whose whereabouts are still not known. There is very little evidence so far on the whereabouts of women and children who were reported to have been held.
@Michael Merritt
I don’t think they’ve released that particular IG report. I’d like to read it too because the report by the IG was what the Bradbury memos were trying to counter.
@CStanley
I think there is one good way to find out the answer to your question and that is to have a full investigation. I happen to favor a career prosecutor/Special prosecutor to investigate but others want a commission of some sort. Either way, whoever is conducting the investigation can view any classified materials to make that determination. They can also have witnesses called for both sides to determine who is telling the truth. The point is we need to know before we have another terrorist attack (and we will eventually) so that those who favor torture can’t then say we got attacked because we stopped torturing.
@Garland
If you think that prosecution of those involved with waterboarding is a good thing, think of the information that could have been gained to prevent a major attack, or something along that line. Yes it may sound a bit paranoid, but we cant afford to NOT be a little bit these days. prosecuting the people involved would only send a message that “You can do what you want to us, and if we catch you, all you will get is 3 hots a cot and all the time you want to laugh at us”. This is a war. Sometimes war calls for extreme measures to prevent loss of life. NOW, that being said, 90-183 times in a month…. Thats a bit TOO extreme. Yes I know I will get flammed for my opinion, and thats fine. I served in the military so you can have that right. Your welcome. If I was given the task of performing interrogations to extract information that may lead to saving peoples lives, and ending war, (not to mention if they were actually one of the planners of a major attack like 9/11) Im not sure if I can honestly say I WOULDNT use some things like water boarding or another form of torture. Yes I said the dreaded “T” word. It does have its uses. You actually think the enemy would be any nicer to us? No dammit, they are beheading thier captives (mostly non-combatants BTW) while filming it and posting for the world to watch. Stop being all touchy feely bible thumping hypicrites and work to ending the threat once and for all. My opinion, take what you want from it.
@CStanley
cosidering the practices of our ancestors, zubayduh is lucky that he was only water tortuered 183 times during that month. over the course of history far worse forms of torture have been used to interrogate p.o.w.’s, why should modern day times be any different? he is a terrorist/ suspected terrorist/threat to our way of life. weather the act of torture is morally right or wrong is not the question posed here, the question is why aren’t we resorting to worse methods of torture to obtain necessary information that is vital to the sustainability of U.S. democracy? does anyone think that if given the chance, and roles were reversed, they, and their culture, would think that something as small as water torture would be unethical in a similiar situation? the vietnamese used unfathomable varieties of torture, they broke our men, and they won. so we basically have 2 choices here. we can “ethically do the right thing” and put ourselves, and our loved ones at risk as well as risk national security for the sake of doing the right thing, or we can do what needs to be done and preserve our way of life. it sucks that it has to be either them or us, but that is the way the world works