CIA Interrogation Tactics

While the law itself condemns use of torture for any purpose, torture becomes necessary to be used in particular critical instances. According to Miles, the United States senate allowed the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on a number of cases and detainees. The human rights should be considered first in any event whether in interrogation or any other course of action1. The policy makers have found themselves between hard and difficult decisions to make on the techniques for obtaining vital information from terrorists who are trained heavily on resisting from giving information when caught in the wrong side of the law.

After watching Frontlines documentary Secrets, Politics and Torture one is automatically faced with mixed views on the major issue, torture, discussed throughout the documentary. At first it shows the different ways our government tries to protect our country and national security, but as one continues to watch the documentary you see how our government attempts to manipulate rules and scenarios in order to help protect the CIA’s inappropriate behavior. On the one hand it is easy to understand why it was unnecessary to torture the prisoners we held captive, but in another light we must also understand the real reasons for acting with such cruel behavior.

Torture is known as the intentional infliction of either physical or psychological harm for the purpose of gaining something – typically information – from the subject for the benefit of the inflictor. Normal human morality would typically argue that this is a wrongful and horrendous act. On the contrary, to deal with the “war on terrorism” torture has begun to work its way towards being an accepted plan of action against terrorism targeting the United States. Terroristic acts perpetrate anger in individuals throughout the United States, so torture has migrated to being considered as a viable form of action through a blind eye. Suspect terrorists arguably have basic human rights and should not be put through such psychologically and physically damaging circumstances.

The United States citizens have been wrestling with the question of, whether their government intelligence agencies should be prohibited from using torture to gather information. According to Michael Ignatieff, this is the hardest case of what he describes as ‘lesser evil ethics’—a political ethics predicated on the idea that in emergencies leaders must choose between different evils Before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, torture was viewed by most American’s as only actions that brutal dictators would employ on their citizens, to keep order within their country. However, this all changed when in May 2004, The New Yorker released photographs from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The disturbing pictures were released on the internet showing bodies of naked Iraqis piled onto each other, others showed Iraqis being tortured and humiliated. There was a huge up roar, which caused the President at the time George W. Bush to publicly apologize, and threaten the job of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Soon after, the CIA Conformed the use of waterboarding on three Al-Qaida suspects in 2002 and 2003, which further annihilated the topic. Since these reports, torture has been in the forefront of national politics, and the public opinion has been struggling to commit on whether torture is right or wrong.

The CIA used waterboarding as an interrogation method to try to get leaders of Al Qaeda to talk. The dilemma came up when Abu Zubaydah, an Al Qaeda leader, became uncooperative in prison. The George Bush administration held meetings to decide what interrogation methods would be legal. A modern form of waterboarding was deemed acceptable and the most extreme interrogation method listed. According to sources, waterboarding has been used on three top Al Qaeda officials (Ross, 2007). The CIA maintains that this method is effective and completely lawful.

There are many forms of torture that have cycled through the ages and cultures. This common water based interrogation practice dates back to the 14th century. Water boarding has been referred to as “water torture”, “water cure” and “tormenta de toca” a phrase that denotes to a thin piece of fabric positioned over victim’s mouth. Water is then slowly poured over the fabric giving the victim a sensation of drowning. It can be very physically painful and psychologically difficult as well for the victim feels like he is dying, yet he is very much alive. It has been used by our country to apprehend extremely dangerous people and stop their planned attacks. The Human Events newspaper published an article quoting “Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee described waterboarding as one of the 10 “techniques” used to retrieve information from Abu Zubaydah, one of Osama bin Laden’s confidants”. Osama bin Laden is the man believed to being responsible for the attacks during 9/11. The interrogation of Abu Zubaydah with water boarding was a key approach to preventing future attempts of terrorism on our soil even though there were some that believed it was inhumane.

It is an undeniable fact that this issue damages the U.S. government. Even so, the U.S. government revealed the truth. President Barack Obama said that “some of the actions that were taken were contrary to our values. That is why I unequivocally banned torture when I took office, because one of our most effective tools in fighting terrorism and keeping Americans safe is staying true to our ideals at home and abroad… No nation is perfect. But one of the strengths that make America exceptional is our willingness to openly confront our past, face our imperfections, make changes and do

Another player in this global debate of enhanced interrogation is the United Nations itself. In May of 2005, the UN issued an 11 page panel report on the adhearance of the United States to the anti-torture treaty. In the report the UN said that the United States should stop the process of enhanced interrogation saying that it was “nothing more than torture”. The US should stop its interrogations of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan by military and civilian staff and prosecute any staff found to have used any of the techniques specific to the enhanced interrogation. The UN report stopped short of admonishing the United States as the US “has a very good record on human rights” , (19 May 2006) Torture was banned by the UN in 1948, in its Universal Declaration of Human Rights of which not only is

Torture has long been a controversial issue in the battle against terrorism. Especially, the catastrophic incident of September 11, 2001 has once again brought the issue into debate, and this time with more rage than ever before. Even until today, the debate over should we or should we not use torture interrogation to obtain information from terrorists has never died down. Many questions were brought up: Does the method go against the law of human rights? Does it help prevent more terrorist attacks? Should it be made visible by law? It is undeniable that the use of torture interrogation surely brings up a lot of problems as well as criticism. One of the biggest problems is that if torture is effective at all. There are

A new congressional report was released last week detailing the controversial CIA torture program during the years following the September 11 attacks on the twin towers. The report detailed several despicable ways detainees were treated at various CIA black sites, detainees endured waterboarding, sleep deprivation, confinements, rectal feeding and death from hypothermia. The most despicable aspect of the report was that psychiatrists, psychologist, and some physicians originated some of the torture techniques used by the CIA.

‘Phycologists find these tactics immoral and beyond torturous, and a ticking time bomb for disaster (O’Donohue).’ Although not everyone disagrees with the tactics Research has shown that these interrogations both have pros and cons. Research from the Phycological association shows that these types of interrogations “betrays trust and human rights, professional ethics and the society's trust (Pope).” For example, many believe that the interrogations break the Miranda rights per the 5th amendment, but others argue that the 5th amendment rights should be reserved only for people holding a valid US citizenship. (Rychlak) Medical ethics of the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba, because these facilities are not on US soil the 5th Amendment rights should also apply to these detainees that are detained, making it a national policy. (Quinn) After the 9/11 attacks congress authorized president Bush to authorize “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons’ (Worthington).” However, this was quickly shut down by former

But then you must ask yourself, who controls the CIA? Are CIA employees aware what they are exerting is considered inhumane? In the year 1933, the first genocides began taking place under the command of Adolf Hitler. Now, almost a century later, there are still articles being released about how Nazi soldiers were being brainwashed into thinking killing people was right. That they were cleansing the world of evil. It was not realized, of course, until after the Holocaust ended. When they watched videos of all who died at their hands, and were in awe that they could perform such sinful acts. Maybe CIA agents are experiencing the same thing. Perhaps they think what they are executing is for the good of our country. The CIA’s affairs could substantially alter the world’s recognition of America. After the Holocaust ended, Germany was extremely embarrassed of what happened. In fact, they still are to this

An actual story told by a journalist that use to work for the CIA was 2 cases of advanced interrogation held by the CIA helped get the name of a messenger that had a secret route to deliver stuff to Osama Bin Laden. Both suspects before going under advanced interrogation went under regular interrogation first for over a month but said that they didn't know anything. Once put under advanced interrogation they released this information leading to the assassination of Osama Bin Laden. This is a perfect example of how using advanced interrogation only if the situation is down to a matter of time works. The killing of Bin Laden also help lead to stopping future attacks planned by the Al Qaeda. Helping to prove that in certain situations advanced interrogation does work, should be used in similar situations to this to continue to stop future attacks before they

After the terrorist attacks on 9/11 CIA interrogation tactics were heighten to rapidly expedite the extraction of information that could lead to the interception of a future terrorist attacks. The Bush Administration was in control during this period of time. The 9/11 attack was significant enough to be the defining change of the twenty first century when it comes to global security. Terrorism violates human rights and constitutes a serious challenge for liberal democracies (Masferrer pg. 1). This subject runs a fine line between human rights and national/international laws. There were a lot of unknowns about how brutal the techniques were of the CIA. The agency also lied to the White House and congress about how intensive their techniques

After the events of September 11, 2001, the United States had a unique dilemma. America was engaged in what would be called a “War on Terror”. This new conflict was unlike any in American history. Previously, in the context of war the United States had always fought a nation or group that had defined boundaries as to where they resided. This new conflict went away from these rules of the past. Terrorist groups were not bound to a region, but were instead united by an ideal. September 11 marked the first time in which terrorism would rise to the forefront of the nation’s agenda. This emergent wave of conflict required a different strategy than the those of the past because of the unorthodox nature of the opponent. One of the major innovations fostered by the “War on Terror” was the expansion of torture. The dramatic rise in terrorism sparked the unethical advancement of interrogation techniques in order to more effectively acquire information. The emergence of the “War on Terror” required government officials acquire intelligence in a new way thus spawning the emergence of “enhanced interrogation” methods, however, the morality of these techniques would come into question as they were revealed to the public.