Iraqi Prisoners Abused, Humiliated, Tortured.

[Cruentus]

I cought a portion of Bill O'rielly's radio show last night (yes, I listen to "liberal" media as well as "Conservative" to get all sides).

The Berg incident is going to be used to link Al Queda to Saddam, to try to justify why we went in to Iraq in the first place. Watch. By no later then next month the media and the administration will be saying, "See...we told you that Al Queda and Iraq were linked! Those men who did that to Berg were Al Queda!"

Supposedly the man who was reading the long message in arabic has been identified by voice to be a certian Al Queda operative (forgot his name though). Considering that would be all to perfect for this administration, and it doesn't collaborate with other evidence, I am skeptical that it is the person they are refering to. However, it may have been Al Queda. But this just means that the pro-war people will use this incident to try to logically present the idea that Al Queda has been in Iraq all along; not thinking critically and realizing that since the fall of Saddam, many terrorist organizations have travelled to Iraq who weren't there before.

There are other sources that say that the Al Queda person that the voice is supposed to match to is actually dead. Then again, there are other sources that also say that the whole thing was staged, which I don't believe.

But, no matter what the truth really is, we'll just have more lies for the use of political posturing rammed down our goards.

 

[michaeledward]

The terrorist referred to is 'al Zawahari', if I am not mistaken, or mis-spelling his name. He is Jordanian by birth. He was reportedly trained at an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. He was reportedly injured during the battles in Afghanistan. The injuries received in Afghanistan were treated in an Iraqi hospital.

'Big John', O'Reilly's guest host on the Radio Factor yesterday was strenuously pushing al Zawahari's treatment in an Iraqi hospital as a Hussein-al Qaeda connection. The premise is, if he was treated in Iraq, it could only be because Saddam Hussein authorized and condoned it.

This premise can be used to explain how George H.W. Bush had links with Timothy McVeigh - after all, McVeigh served in GHWBush's Gulf War, and lived under GHW Bush's presidency. So, they must be linked. Can't you all see it.

 

[marshallbd]

Exactly why I am not buying the "top down order" excuse. Firstly, when the words come out of a private's mouth, what do they really mean by "top down?" Hell, they have no idea where the order came from other than an NCO/Officer from their chain of command or NCO/Officer's that their chain of command allows to give orders to these non rates.

You know what is right and wrong. You know that you are not only allowed, but obligated to refuse unlawful orders... these pictures show how important strong small unit leadership is to a units morale and conduct. The intell/interrogation operations should have been conducted by Intel people, not MP's - especially reserve/NG troopies. The unit commander's should have told the intel guys to do so themselves - MP's might have run camp security, but that isn't the same as being intell/interrogation trained.

I just heard a small blurb of a quote from one of the soldiers involved that the command did not know what was going on...he said if they did "there would be hell to pay" this soldier is expected to plead guilty at his court martial. :asian:

 

[loki09789]

I just heard a small blurb of a quote from one of the soldiers involved that the command did not know what was going on...he said if they did "there would be hell to pay" this soldier is expected to plead guilty at his court martial. :asian:

If he does, I respect his willingness to take personal responsibility. Believe it or not, the military will also recognize the demonstration of moral courage/accountability as well. I think it should be the case all up and down the chain of command for those involved. Those who were neglegent in leadership roles should take ownership of that, those who shirked professionalism/decency for speed should own up too.

Again, with PsyOps though, how many of these stories and claims/pictures were creations intended to shake prisoners into talking vs. how many of them are real is left to be discovered. Some of the stories will be true, but some are really far fetched to be true and sound as if it is a 'story from a guy who heard it from...' among the prisoners. I know that according to the Geneva code, a fighting man/woman is suppose to continue the fight even as a prisoner. Some (but definitely not all) of this could be a smear campaign as part of that spirit.

I notice there hasn't been any mention of the intell that was collected, confirmed or acted on successfully from all this mess. I wonder what good stuff/dope/intell came from all of this. What ever it was/is, I don't know if it is worth it to win the little missions or the 'war' but sacrifice international image, just seems to make more problems than it is worth.

 

[loki09789]

Respectfully, Paul, I think you missed this document.

http://www.michael-robinett.com/declass/c000.htm

Torture and mental duress were an official part of US policy in the past. Why would that just go away? MKU may be a project that was discontinued, but it does not mean that it didn't evolve.

I didn't miss the document, but I doubt that a lt. in the Military Intelligence corps was privy to it in his training. This really smacks of over zealous, under trained attempts at initiative at lower levels because of nonspecific, unclear communications of 'urgency' from above.....

 

[Cruentus]

This premise can be used to explain how George H.W. Bush had links with Timothy McVeigh - after all, McVeigh served in GHWBush's Gulf War, and lived under GHW Bush's presidency. So, they must be linked. Can't you all see it.

I can see it now... must be good citizen....must....support president...must... :uhohh: :erg:

 

[Tgace]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Making 'em Talk[/font]
Sunday 14 July 2002
repeated the following Wednesday at 2.30pm
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]US military interrogators are currently having a hard time extracting information from the ex-Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters detained in Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay. Hardly surprising - but how do you get inside the minds of hostile captives, without going outside the constraints of the Geneva Convention? Is there such thing as a truth drug? This week we talk to two psychiatrists, as well as one military man with hands-on experience; he's the author of an interrogators' manual entitled "Make 'em Talk".[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Transcript:
[/font]David Rutledge: Hi, David Rutledge here, welcoming you once again to All in the Mind. And it’s the vulnerability and the resilience of the mind that’s our subject this week. Specifically, the minds of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters held in American captivity in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. These captives, including the two Australians David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib, live in small chain-wire cells, under constant spotlight surveillance, dressed in orange boiler suits, at times manacled and at times blindfolded. And these captives have been specifically chosen for extensive interrogation.

We don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the interrogation rooms. However, we do know that military psychologists and military psychiatrists are supporting the interrogation teams. The captives are classified as “illegal combatants” and not prisoners of war, so they’re not protected under the Geneva Convention. We can therefore assume that when it comes to their interrogation, the gloves will be coming off. Well, it was a Pentagon official who said recently that “all appropriate steps and measures are being taken to turn the interrogations up a notch”. But how exactly are such interrogations “turned up a notch”? What happens to the mind in solitary confinement? and is there such thing as a truth drug?

This week Paul Brennan has gone in search of some answers.

Paul Brennan: We have inherited from the second world war the now comic cliché ‘we have ways of making you talk.’ The interrogator’s aim is to extract from the prisoner information that can be turned against the enemy, either in the military or the propaganda war. Military interrogators work in various ways. The British, prior to interrogating some Irish insurgents, put black bags over their heads and made them stand against a wall with their hands on their heads for days. They bombarded them with 85 decibel noise of whirling helicopter blades. During the Yom Kippur War, some Israeli soldiers captured by the Russians were injected with high doses of a drug that caused screamingly painful muscle cramps and panic breathing. This helped the interrogators. Another high-tech way of giving the prisoner a pummelling without leaving too many bruises, is to use silent and low frequency ultrasound. It induces vomiting, disorientation, epilepsy and can be delivered with accuracy by laser beam.

But it’s still the good old rough-and-ready third degree that remains popular with the front line military. Bob Newman is a former US marine with some practical experience interrogating Iraqis during Desert Storm. He’s written a book about interrogation techniques – which include exhaustion, isolation, degradation and fear. Newman’s book is called Make ‘Em Talk. So what makes a good interrogator?

Bob Newman: First of all, he needs to be mature, and to be focused very tightly on objectives and goals that he wants to reach. He has to be patient and very disciplined. The information that a good interrogator can extract from a source, a prisoner of war, could really make the difference between success on the battlefield and a very bloody failure.

Paul Brennan: Now, tell us about your experience as a fighter/interrogator during Desert Storm. We’re talking Kuwait 1991.

Bob Newman: We started taking prisoners in staggering numbers, and we did not have enough interrogators, true interrogators, whose fulltime job it is in the Marine Corps to interrogate people, to process quickly enough on the battlefield all of the people we were capturing. So in part, folks up at the regimental and divisional level were relying on the very few people, such as myself, who had some interrogation experience. So we had to do very quick battlefield interrogations, where we wanted tactical information – not strategic information or biographical information, but tactical information – that could help the battlefield commander on the spot. So we wanted to know unit disposition, unit strength, weapons, unit movement, and especially immediate future plans, so that we could prevent those plans from ever taking place.

Paul Brennan: Now, in your book Make ‘Em Talk, some of the interrogation techniques sound to me like torture. Are they?

Bob Newman: No, they’re not. As a matter of fact, if you read through the book, you’ll see a lot of insistence that it is absolutely unnecessary and absolutely illegal to torture somebody. Torture gains physical compliance, and if you speak to former prisoners of war such as the Americans who ended up in the Hanoi Hilton, the Hoa Lo Prison in downtown Hanoi during our Vietnam War, they’ll tell you that somebody who has physical control of you can make you do what they want you to do. It doesn’t necessarily mean that torture can get good, useful, practical battlefield information. (my emphasis)

Paul Brennan: A commentator in the Wall Street Journal recently advocated the use of truth serums on the Taliban and Al-Qaeda prisoners at Camp X-Ray and Camp Delta. What do you think?

Bob Newman: Well, that’s an old ploy from Hollywood movies, frankly. There is no such thing as truth serum. But if you want to get him to blab a little bit, and feel a little more comfortable, and get him to “open up” if you will, then sodium pentathol can be useful.

Paul Brennan: A Pentagon official said recently that interrogations of Taliban and Al-Qaeda suspects were going to be “turned up a notch”, that’s his phrase. How precisely can interrogations be “turned up a notch”?

Bob Newman: Well, how about this. The first thing we’re going to do is bring in some interrogators that he has not experienced before. And here’s an example: instead of the interrogator coming in, announcing who he is and demonstrating control, that he is in charge of the situation to the source, we could bring in somebody who does not come across as an interrogator. Perhaps he’s posing as a fellow prisoner of war, and is going to use soft sell techniques to get the information out of the prisoner, the real prisoner, without him even knowing that his new room mate is ‘on the other side’. What I really like to use, and I’ve found this to be extremely useful, is sleep deprivation. But what you have to do with sleep deprivation, be very careful that the source does not become so tired that he is giving you information that he thinks is accurate, but in reality is very inaccurate. So that’s a problem there. Another thing that you can always use is the reward system. Let’s say he’s used to getting one bowl of rice and a small piece of meat and all the water he can drink every day. The second one for “turning up the notch” would be to reward him with additional food, food that he really likes. And you can find out what food he really likes by any number of sources. One is to simply ask him what he likes, find out a little bit more about his culture, where he grew up, what would be standard meals for him, and merely show him that by co-operating he will be rewarded. And finally, you can turn up the heat by a technique that refers back to his family. By letting him know and stressing to him that he will survive this situation if he co-operates, and he will be back as soon as we can possibly get him back with his family. He will be repatriated. And therefore that is a reward system as well.

Paul Brennan: Modern interrogation technology has really got the prisoner under it’s thumb.

Bob Newman: Absolutely and that’s what it is: the prisoner is under the interrogator’s thumb. Look at Mr. Abu Zubaida, the number three man in Al-Qaeda, who is under US care right now. He is the guy who, under proper interrogation, gave up the name of American Jose Padilla, a Chicago gangland member who was planning to detonate a radiological or “dirty” bomb in Washington DC. Zubaida gave us Padilla’s name because Zubaida was properly interrogated.

Paul Brennan: Bob Newman, counter-terrorist consultant in Denver Colorado.

Now, even if the interrogations are carried out within the constraints of the Geneva Conventions, the sheer persistence and duration of such interrogations can still leave you in poor mental shape. Professor Derrick Silove is a consultant psychiatrist at the Sydney-based organization STARTTS, Service for the Treatment and Rehabilitation of Torture and Trauma Survivors. I asked him about the range of symptoms presented by survivors of interrogation.

Derrick Silove: The range is very wide, actually, because we obviously see a skewed sample. We see people who had severe reactions, and we shouldn’t forget that a lot of people go through it without too much trouble. They might have a few sleepless nights and a few bad dreams and that’s the end of it. So we see the high end of the spectrum, of people who have what we call post traumatic stress disorder and/or depression – the two often go together – and when they have the full-blown syndrome, it’s pretty serious. Because then they really have serious sleep disturbances, nightmares, flashbacks, their concentration is impaired, they may be very depressed and even suicidal.

Paul Brennan: Do you have evidence from your patients that confirms that drugs are being used by military interrogators?

Derrick Silove: Yes, there’s no doubt. It’s becoming a worldwide trend. Psychoactive drugs are available, both illicit and legal ones, across the world. And they have a very profound effect on reducing resistance.

Paul Brennan: Can you give us an example of how one or two or perhaps three drugs work and help the military interrogator?

Derrick Silove: Well, they often use combinations. So you get a combination of sedative drugs and stimulant drugs, which can be very disorientating, because on the one hand you’re kind of stupefied, and half drowsy and half asleep, which reduces your resistance in a sort of drunk-like state. On the other hand, you’re being aroused and stimulated, and your brain is charging very rapidly, and so you are more likely to talk a lot and spill the beans and free-associate. So it can be incredibly disorientating and undermining when you get these cocktails of drugs.

Paul Brennan: When people come to you as a result of that kind of interrogation, how do you actually pick up the pieces, psychologically speaking?

Derrick Silove: The core strategy is still a counselling approach. That is to re-engage the person; they often feel very cut off from humanity as a consequence, and everything else really flows from that engagement in terms of providing practical assistance, medication sometimes, psychological support of various kinds, and a willingness to actually listen to the story as it unravels. Because people feel very lonely and isolated with this knowledge which they’ve never often been able to communicate to anybody else, out of shame and guilt and many other reasons.

Paul Brennan: In addition to drugs, military interrogators use – and have used for years – solitary confinement. How does that actually work on the mind?

Derrick Silove: People firstly become very disorientated. They lose track of time, day and night, especially if the lights are left on all the time or they are in dark all the time, so they lose track of time. That in itself is very psychologically undermining. It’s something that none of us really experience, but if you lose track of time you really get very distressed and disturbed. You also lose a spatial orientation. You start losing track of where you are, what the place is and so on. So you start developing what is almost like a delirium, you really feel like you’re out of touch with reality. People get paranoid, they misinterpret everything as threatening, they become very focused on obsessional thoughts. For example, the next meal becomes the key issue. So their mind become very constrained in its capacity to think widely and broadly, and the sense of loneliness, being cut off from the world is immense.

Paul Brennan: What’s the difference in long-term prognosis between those who’ve survived interrogation without spilling the beans, and those who have in some way either compromised themselves or their friends?

Derrick Silove: I think that makes a huge difference. But I should also say that with so-called modern techniques, very few end up not spilling the beans. Because if the interrogators are well-versed in their trade, it is actually almost impossible to resist. But those who have spilled the beans under certain circumstances, are those people who are very racked by guilt, shame, a sense of being completely devastated by the experience. And they feel that their integrity has been destroyed. I’ve had one patient say “there are just bits and pieces of me left scattered around the interrogation room, I just don’t exist any more as an integrated human being”, and I thought that was a very stark illustration of what it feels like. Especially if you’ve been a militant or someone with very strongly held ethical standards prior to that.

Paul Brennan: Professor Derrick Silove.

Military interrogations hold prisoners in solitary confinement where everything is controlled: the prisoner’s lighting, the noise, the temperature, their air supply, their total visual environment, as well as their access to food, water and ablutions. On top of all this are many possibilities for medical, chemical and electrical interventions into the prisoner’s body and into the prisoner’s mind. So with all this physical and psychological power in the hands of the interrogators, the crucial question is: isn’t it really just a matter of time before the prisoner’s mind is destroyed? Derrick Silove again.

Derrick Silove: I wouldn’t go as far as to say that the mind is destroyed totally or forever. I think people can recover from this. I think they always say they’ve changed as a person, they’re not the same person. But I think the key lesson is that there is a threshold beyond which people can’t resist, and the modern techniques very quickly reach that threshold.

Paul Brennan: How important, then, is religious belief?

Derrick Silove: Well, the research certainly shows that adherence to religion can be a very protective factor. There’s no doubt that people who have the comfort of religion – because that’s something that you can take with you into any situation, including solitary confinement – it can make a huge difference. But I also have to say that there are those people who, at the end of these processes, give up on their religion or on any spiritual faith, because they’ve kind of lost faith. And that’s a very devastating experience. They just cannot believe a true god or gods could sanction such a thing, and therefore it actually destroys their faith.

Paul Brennan: If you were trying to help somebody who was perhaps going to go into military interrogation, what kind of advice could you give them as a psychiatrist?

Derrick Silove: Well, it’s interesting that it’s not just psychiatrists, but actually some militant groups in various parts of the world actually do train their cadres to do precisely that. So we have some knowledge about that, and it’s the obvious: the one is to try to draw on the experiences of those who have been through it, to prepare the person exactly for all the variations of interrogation that they’re likely to go through. The second thing, and I think that’s the most helpful, is to tell them to spill the beans – and groups do that nowadays. They say, they tell them quite precisely “don’t spill the beans too quickly, otherwise they won’t believe you. Put up a sham resistance, and then pretend that it’s all over, calmly, and tell them whatever you know”. And the way they prepare them for that is by giving them as little information as possible, in other words make sure that each individual knows very little, and basically elaborate if you need to, with a bit of imagination to satisfy whatever they want. Because basically, withholding that information just doesn’t help in the end.

Paul Brennan: So there’s no future for the tight-lipped hero?

Derrick Silove: Very little, unfortunately. I think they are more the substance of novels nowadays, rather than reality.

Paul Brennan: Derrick Silove, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of New South Wales.

For many months now, prisoners have been held for interrogation at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. They’ll all Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters and they’re all Muslims. What can we surmise about the vulnerability and resilience of their minds in the face of modern interrogation methods? Dr. Malik Badri is Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur. He’s held academic positions in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, and has also written a book on contemplation in Islam. Dr. Malik Badri describes the ordeals of Bilal, one of Islam’s first political prisoners during the seventh century.

Malik Badri: Bilal was an Ethiopian slave in Mecca. And his master used to, when he accepted Islam and rejected the bowing to their stone carved gods, he was taken in the hot sun and they would put very heavy stones on them and he would beat him and tell him, “just say something to say that you have refused Islam, and say something good about our gods” but he would only repeat the words ahadun ahad, God is only One. And he was able to feel that all the pain that he received was something that would bring him nearer and nearer to God, since he is sacrificing for the sake of God.

Another prisoner in Islamic history, a man who was put in prison a few centuries ago, was Ibn Taymiyyah. And he was put in prison in Cairo, he was from Damascus. Ibn Taymiyyah was very famous for having said the very famous sentence when he was arrested. He said, “What are they going to do to me? If they put me in prison then this is a chance for me for contemplation. If they send me out of the country, to deport me, it would be like tourism. And if they kill me, I will be a martyr. What can they do to me?”

Paul Brennan: Now, while a Muslim warrior can no longer continue his jihad of the sword, in prison he must continue his mental and spiritual jihad. What does this actually involve?

Malik Badri: They say when the Prophet came from a battle, he said to his companions, “We have returned from the small jihad to the major jihad.” They asked him, “What is the major jihad? What is more than what we were doing?” He said, “The jihad of the soul, the jihad of your desires that take you away from God, is a greater jihad. This is the major jihad.” Prayer is very important, the repetition of certain exhortations to Allah is very important. This by itself will bring about a form of relaxation. It can increase the hormones that are related to relaxation, and make the person in a happy state which cannot be described by words.

Paul Brennan: Would a Muslim see their survival in prison as a kind of divine test, a divine lesson?

Malik Badri: Yes indeed. You see, if man can actually transcend himself to a higher level of reality, then indeed, whatever happens to man in terms of something which is painful, can be explained cognitively by him in two ways. Either this is a way by which God is helping him to forgive his sins, or else it is a way by which God elevates his position spiritually. So people who are in prison, who have this kind of conception, will actually be able to tolerate their imprisonment very well. And they can see that the prison is something which God has sent them in order to improve their status.

Paul Brennan: Now, while solitary confinement can separate every single prisoner from every other prisoner, do you think in some way they can communicate through something like a common heart or a common spirit?

Malik Badri: People when they are in prison, and when they are in solitary confinement, it seems that their psychic ability will be sharpened. I have known of a number of cases in which people who came out of prison, they would say they would actually know about what is happening in their homes, by their dreams. And at times, while they are awake, they would get this kind of – what we call inspiration. I feel that those people who have a belief in a hereafter, and the ability actually to communicate, these people are the ones who can tolerate quite a lot of psychological stress in prison. Even they can tolerate physical stress which does interfere chemically with their brains.

Paul Brennan: How can they spiritually transcend a truth drug?

Malik Badri: When it comes to the chemical, then the bodies of all people are the same. We must say that even we, in the field of psychiatry, we are using these drugs already. And a patient who has a lot of pent up feelings, maybe he has secrets which he cannot say to the doctor, is given a drug at times, and this drug will make him speak. This is what is known as catharsis, or abreaction, and in this sense we are actually using something which can also be used in prisons, to let those in prison who know certain information, can bring it up. Modern technology has actually been able, and modern medicine and modern biochemistry, if used in this manner, it can actually wreck anybody.

Paul Brennan: Dr. Malik Badri, Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur.


So there it is: according to one interrogator, one psychiatrist and one Muslim psychologist, all human beings, when subject to the vast battery of interrogation techniques, can be threatened, bribed or just pharmaceutically steered into spilling the beans. This surely dispels forever the romantic vision of the human mind as the resilient repository of the sacred self. The biotechnologies of interrogation, it seems, are heralding the post-human future, where your mind is not necessarily your own.

David Rutledge: Paul Brennan there, reporting on military interrogation.

 

[Tgace]

My point about "solution" is...is there intelligence we need to get and if so how far should we go to get it? Just asking for it isnt going to work. What techniques are OK and what is torture? If you thought that a prisoner you had knew about an immenent attack on a 9/11 scale...how far would you go to get that intel? What techniques do you think are OK and whats too far. Thats presenting an idea.

My idea...I have no problem with the sensory deprivation,drugs (carefully applied), yes..even threats of physical harm without actually doing it,nudity, hooding etc. If its applied as a technique of interrogation for an exact purpose and not for entertainment, vengance or sadistic pleasure of guards.

I do have a problem with actual physical harm being inflicted, sexual abuse, forcing prisoners into degrading acts with each other etc.

 

[Cryozombie]

Hey, here's a little number from the latest news, available on my Microsoft browser front page:

"The father of Nick Berg, the American beheaded in Iraq, directly blamed President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for his son's death. "My son died for the sins of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. This administration did this."
But I know that won't bother anyone: personal attacks are so much easier.

Yes but... in all reality isn't that exactly what that is? A personal Attack by Nick Berg's father on President Bush? Unfortuantley, regardless of George Jr's f-ups, In Nick Berg's case the president had nothing to do with it... Nick Berg was not "Sent there" he chose to go, I recall reading that he considered going a... what did they say... rush? thrill? somthing along those lines... We know how far out you are, so of course instead of seeing that you use it as ammo against the Administration you claim to be brought up so strongly to believe in.

I continue to be amazed by the utter failure on the part of some to recognize--or to admit, perhaps--a completely unacceptable series of violations of very basic moral precepts. 'Scuse me if I'm wrong, but aren't some of you the guys who keep lecturing the likes of me on the need for Solid, Timeless, Unchanging Moral Values? Or do these just apply when--I'm trying to put this politely--we're talking about WASPs? Or, I know--moral precepts apply only when it's convenient.

I continue to be amazed by the utter failure on the part of YOU to recognize--or to admit, perhaps-- that most everyone here has said we went too far... But no... all you can hear with your own ego stroking going on about how you are brought up better than the rest of us is "YAY, LETS TORTURE RAGHEADS FOR FUN!" (Pardon the expression, but I feel like that is what Robert thinks of us)

I continue to be amazed by the reiteration of the notion that I keep floating away from the Real Point on the part of people who keep dragging poor Nicholas Berg into it.

Well Sir, if you wish for people to stop reiterating that notion, you have but to ADDRESS people's questions directed at you, instead of going off on some tangent that does not answer what you were asked. I know focus is a big deal... but can you try it before complaining people claim you have none?

Because, gee, they taught me that this country was, "the last best hope," of humankind precisely because WE WERE SOMETHING NEW, AND BETTER, AND WE DID NOT STOOP TO THE EVIL THAT THE BAD GUYS DID, NO MATTER WHAT THE PROVOCATION. Hell, they even taught me that America set an example of justice, peace, and tolerance for the rest of the world to follow.

This is the notion that has the situation completely ATFU. AMERICA didn't do those things... SOME PEOPLE DID. PEOPLE are failible, and as such, PEOPLE DO THINGS WRONG. PEOPLE, angry, sad, vengeful, or just plain MEAN did what they did because they were facing an Enemy who's NATION felt it was ok... I'm sorry to hurt your moral feelings, but AMERICA still is better. Why can I say that? Because Instead of celebrating this evil those INDIVIDUALS did, we are looking to punish them... not dancing in the streets and cheering. But you don't believe that.

I realize it's comforting for a couple of you guys to believe that I was raised by Lesbian communists just outside Beijing,

Haha, theres that LSD again making you think we said things we didnt.

but the fact of the matter is that I will bet you I was raised far more traditionally than anybody on this thread, with the possible exception of Mr. Edward. And you know what they taught me, way back then? That my country was better than torturers and bullies and dictators and imperialists and liars.

Wow. Nice Ego. Does it come with a display case or do you just take it out and show it to people?

Some other time, we can get into the whole 'nother issue of a martial artist's response to this stuff. Guess they got that wrong too--I always read, and was taught, that a martial artist shows restraint and compassion at all times, and never bullies. They didn't even bring up the whole issue of whether a martial artist was allowed to torment the helpless, whatever the reason or cause might be.

Guess they figured that the answer to that last bit was obvious.

Maybe you read too much. try living... OUTSIDE of a book. The notion "that a martial artist shows restraint and compassion at all times, and never bullies" is a nice one... and it is, I agree, (OMG we agree on somthing???) the most commonly taught... but it is NOT the only notion taught. Add to that, ONCE AGAIN that people are failible, and well... Keep in mind, Robert, the "martial" in martial arts refers to fighting, combat and warfare... and durring a fight, only being "honorable and moral" leads to one thing... and its not "going home safley" after the battle is over.

 

[Makalakumu]

I didn't miss the document, but I doubt that a lt. in the Military Intelligence corps was privy to it in his training. This really smacks of over zealous, under trained attempts at initiative at lower levels because of nonspecific, unclear communications of 'urgency' from above.....

If you have the time, read through it. Its very interesting reading and the kind of mental and physical duress described in the photos slips into this framework. I'm not sure how it was arranged through the chain of command, perhaps this was a case in which the chain of command was hijacked by the CIA. At the Senate hearing, the joint cheifs were talking about this very thing.

We all could go round and round on this forever. The truth is that we just won't be privy to the information that could answer our questions. I'm sick of speculating. Trust nothing unless it comes directly from the people involved. And then you can expect half of that pool of information to be lies. Anyone with half a connection to this thing is going to pulling up the iron undies - dispicable - yet ya gotta cover yer butt.

 

[Makalakumu]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Making 'em Talk[/font]
Sunday 14 July 2002
repeated the following Wednesday at 2.30pm
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]US military interrogators are currently having a hard time extracting information from the ex-Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters detained in Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay. Hardly surprising - but how do you get inside the minds of hostile captives, without going outside the constraints of the Geneva Convention? Is there such thing as a truth drug? This week we talk to two psychiatrists, as well as one military man with hands-on experience; he's the author of an interrogators' manual entitled "Make 'em Talk".[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Transcript:
[/font]David Rutledge: Hi, David Rutledge here, welcoming you once again to All in the Mind. And it’s the vulnerability and the resilience of the mind that’s our subject this week. Specifically, the minds of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters held in American captivity in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. These captives, including the two Australians David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib, live in small chain-wire cells, under constant spotlight surveillance, dressed in orange boiler suits, at times manacled and at times blindfolded. And these captives have been specifically chosen for extensive interrogation.

We don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the interrogation rooms. However, we do know that military psychologists and military psychiatrists are supporting the interrogation teams. The captives are classified as “illegal combatants” and not prisoners of war, so they’re not protected under the Geneva Convention. We can therefore assume that when it comes to their interrogation, the gloves will be coming off. Well, it was a Pentagon official who said recently that “all appropriate steps and measures are being taken to turn the interrogations up a notch”. But how exactly are such interrogations “turned up a notch”? What happens to the mind in solitary confinement? and is there such thing as a truth drug?

This week Paul Brennan has gone in search of some answers.

Paul Brennan: We have inherited from the second world war the now comic cliché ‘we have ways of making you talk.’ The interrogator’s aim is to extract from the prisoner information that can be turned against the enemy, either in the military or the propaganda war. Military interrogators work in various ways. The British, prior to interrogating some Irish insurgents, put black bags over their heads and made them stand against a wall with their hands on their heads for days. They bombarded them with 85 decibel noise of whirling helicopter blades. During the Yom Kippur War, some Israeli soldiers captured by the Russians were injected with high doses of a drug that caused screamingly painful muscle cramps and panic breathing. This helped the interrogators. Another high-tech way of giving the prisoner a pummelling without leaving too many bruises, is to use silent and low frequency ultrasound. It induces vomiting, disorientation, epilepsy and can be delivered with accuracy by laser beam.

But it’s still the good old rough-and-ready third degree that remains popular with the front line military. Bob Newman is a former US marine with some practical experience interrogating Iraqis during Desert Storm. He’s written a book about interrogation techniques – which include exhaustion, isolation, degradation and fear. Newman’s book is called Make ‘Em Talk. So what makes a good interrogator?

Bob Newman: First of all, he needs to be mature, and to be focused very tightly on objectives and goals that he wants to reach. He has to be patient and very disciplined. The information that a good interrogator can extract from a source, a prisoner of war, could really make the difference between success on the battlefield and a very bloody failure.

Paul Brennan: Now, tell us about your experience as a fighter/interrogator during Desert Storm. We’re talking Kuwait 1991.

Bob Newman: We started taking prisoners in staggering numbers, and we did not have enough interrogators, true interrogators, whose fulltime job it is in the Marine Corps to interrogate people, to process quickly enough on the battlefield all of the people we were capturing. So in part, folks up at the regimental and divisional level were relying on the very few people, such as myself, who had some interrogation experience. So we had to do very quick battlefield interrogations, where we wanted tactical information – not strategic information or biographical information, but tactical information – that could help the battlefield commander on the spot. So we wanted to know unit disposition, unit strength, weapons, unit movement, and especially immediate future plans, so that we could prevent those plans from ever taking place.

Paul Brennan: Now, in your book Make ‘Em Talk, some of the interrogation techniques sound to me like torture. Are they?

Bob Newman: No, they’re not. As a matter of fact, if you read through the book, you’ll see a lot of insistence that it is absolutely unnecessary and absolutely illegal to torture somebody. Torture gains physical compliance, and if you speak to former prisoners of war such as the Americans who ended up in the Hanoi Hilton, the Hoa Lo Prison in downtown Hanoi during our Vietnam War, they’ll tell you that somebody who has physical control of you can make you do what they want you to do. It doesn’t necessarily mean that torture can get good, useful, practical battlefield information. (my emphasis)

Paul Brennan: A commentator in the Wall Street Journal recently advocated the use of truth serums on the Taliban and Al-Qaeda prisoners at Camp X-Ray and Camp Delta. What do you think?

Bob Newman: Well, that’s an old ploy from Hollywood movies, frankly. There is no such thing as truth serum. But if you want to get him to blab a little bit, and feel a little more comfortable, and get him to “open up” if you will, then sodium pentathol can be useful.

Paul Brennan: A Pentagon official said recently that interrogations of Taliban and Al-Qaeda suspects were going to be “turned up a notch”, that’s his phrase. How precisely can interrogations be “turned up a notch”?

Bob Newman: Well, how about this. The first thing we’re going to do is bring in some interrogators that he has not experienced before. And here’s an example: instead of the interrogator coming in, announcing who he is and demonstrating control, that he is in charge of the situation to the source, we could bring in somebody who does not come across as an interrogator. Perhaps he’s posing as a fellow prisoner of war, and is going to use soft sell techniques to get the information out of the prisoner, the real prisoner, without him even knowing that his new room mate is ‘on the other side’. What I really like to use, and I’ve found this to be extremely useful, is sleep deprivation. But what you have to do with sleep deprivation, be very careful that the source does not become so tired that he is giving you information that he thinks is accurate, but in reality is very inaccurate. So that’s a problem there. Another thing that you can always use is the reward system. Let’s say he’s used to getting one bowl of rice and a small piece of meat and all the water he can drink every day. The second one for “turning up the notch” would be to reward him with additional food, food that he really likes. And you can find out what food he really likes by any number of sources. One is to simply ask him what he likes, find out a little bit more about his culture, where he grew up, what would be standard meals for him, and merely show him that by co-operating he will be rewarded. And finally, you can turn up the heat by a technique that refers back to his family. By letting him know and stressing to him that he will survive this situation if he co-operates, and he will be back as soon as we can possibly get him back with his family. He will be repatriated. And therefore that is a reward system as well.

Paul Brennan: Modern interrogation technology has really got the prisoner under it’s thumb.

Bob Newman: Absolutely and that’s what it is: the prisoner is under the interrogator’s thumb. Look at Mr. Abu Zubaida, the number three man in Al-Qaeda, who is under US care right now. He is the guy who, under proper interrogation, gave up the name of American Jose Padilla, a Chicago gangland member who was planning to detonate a radiological or “dirty” bomb in Washington DC. Zubaida gave us Padilla’s name because Zubaida was properly interrogated.

Paul Brennan: Bob Newman, counter-terrorist consultant in Denver Colorado.

Now, even if the interrogations are carried out within the constraints of the Geneva Conventions, the sheer persistence and duration of such interrogations can still leave you in poor mental shape. Professor Derrick Silove is a consultant psychiatrist at the Sydney-based organization STARTTS, Service for the Treatment and Rehabilitation of Torture and Trauma Survivors. I asked him about the range of symptoms presented by survivors of interrogation.

Derrick Silove: The range is very wide, actually, because we obviously see a skewed sample. We see people who had severe reactions, and we shouldn’t forget that a lot of people go through it without too much trouble. They might have a few sleepless nights and a few bad dreams and that’s the end of it. So we see the high end of the spectrum, of people who have what we call post traumatic stress disorder and/or depression – the two often go together – and when they have the full-blown syndrome, it’s pretty serious. Because then they really have serious sleep disturbances, nightmares, flashbacks, their concentration is impaired, they may be very depressed and even suicidal.

Paul Brennan: Do you have evidence from your patients that confirms that drugs are being used by military interrogators?

Derrick Silove: Yes, there’s no doubt. It’s becoming a worldwide trend. Psychoactive drugs are available, both illicit and legal ones, across the world. And they have a very profound effect on reducing resistance.

Paul Brennan: Can you give us an example of how one or two or perhaps three drugs work and help the military interrogator?

Derrick Silove: Well, they often use combinations. So you get a combination of sedative drugs and stimulant drugs, which can be very disorientating, because on the one hand you’re kind of stupefied, and half drowsy and half asleep, which reduces your resistance in a sort of drunk-like state. On the other hand, you’re being aroused and stimulated, and your brain is charging very rapidly, and so you are more likely to talk a lot and spill the beans and free-associate. So it can be incredibly disorientating and undermining when you get these cocktails of drugs.

Paul Brennan: When people come to you as a result of that kind of interrogation, how do you actually pick up the pieces, psychologically speaking?

Derrick Silove: The core strategy is still a counselling approach. That is to re-engage the person; they often feel very cut off from humanity as a consequence, and everything else really flows from that engagement in terms of providing practical assistance, medication sometimes, psychological support of various kinds, and a willingness to actually listen to the story as it unravels. Because people feel very lonely and isolated with this knowledge which they’ve never often been able to communicate to anybody else, out of shame and guilt and many other reasons.

Paul Brennan: In addition to drugs, military interrogators use – and have used for years – solitary confinement. How does that actually work on the mind?

Derrick Silove: People firstly become very disorientated. They lose track of time, day and night, especially if the lights are left on all the time or they are in dark all the time, so they lose track of time. That in itself is very psychologically undermining. It’s something that none of us really experience, but if you lose track of time you really get very distressed and disturbed. You also lose a spatial orientation. You start losing track of where you are, what the place is and so on. So you start developing what is almost like a delirium, you really feel like you’re out of touch with reality. People get paranoid, they misinterpret everything as threatening, they become very focused on obsessional thoughts. For example, the next meal becomes the key issue. So their mind become very constrained in its capacity to think widely and broadly, and the sense of loneliness, being cut off from the world is immense.

Paul Brennan: What’s the difference in long-term prognosis between those who’ve survived interrogation without spilling the beans, and those who have in some way either compromised themselves or their friends?

Derrick Silove: I think that makes a huge difference. But I should also say that with so-called modern techniques, very few end up not spilling the beans. Because if the interrogators are well-versed in their trade, it is actually almost impossible to resist. But those who have spilled the beans under certain circumstances, are those people who are very racked by guilt, shame, a sense of being completely devastated by the experience. And they feel that their integrity has been destroyed. I’ve had one patient say “there are just bits and pieces of me left scattered around the interrogation room, I just don’t exist any more as an integrated human being”, and I thought that was a very stark illustration of what it feels like. Especially if you’ve been a militant or someone with very strongly held ethical standards prior to that.

Paul Brennan: Professor Derrick Silove.

Military interrogations hold prisoners in solitary confinement where everything is controlled: the prisoner’s lighting, the noise, the temperature, their air supply, their total visual environment, as well as their access to food, water and ablutions. On top of all this are many possibilities for medical, chemical and electrical interventions into the prisoner’s body and into the prisoner’s mind. So with all this physical and psychological power in the hands of the interrogators, the crucial question is: isn’t it really just a matter of time before the prisoner’s mind is destroyed? Derrick Silove again.

Derrick Silove: I wouldn’t go as far as to say that the mind is destroyed totally or forever. I think people can recover from this. I think they always say they’ve changed as a person, they’re not the same person. But I think the key lesson is that there is a threshold beyond which people can’t resist, and the modern techniques very quickly reach that threshold.

Paul Brennan: How important, then, is religious belief?

Derrick Silove: Well, the research certainly shows that adherence to religion can be a very protective factor. There’s no doubt that people who have the comfort of religion – because that’s something that you can take with you into any situation, including solitary confinement – it can make a huge difference. But I also have to say that there are those people who, at the end of these processes, give up on their religion or on any spiritual faith, because they’ve kind of lost faith. And that’s a very devastating experience. They just cannot believe a true god or gods could sanction such a thing, and therefore it actually destroys their faith.

Paul Brennan: If you were trying to help somebody who was perhaps going to go into military interrogation, what kind of advice could you give them as a psychiatrist?

Derrick Silove: Well, it’s interesting that it’s not just psychiatrists, but actually some militant groups in various parts of the world actually do train their cadres to do precisely that. So we have some knowledge about that, and it’s the obvious: the one is to try to draw on the experiences of those who have been through it, to prepare the person exactly for all the variations of interrogation that they’re likely to go through. The second thing, and I think that’s the most helpful, is to tell them to spill the beans – and groups do that nowadays. They say, they tell them quite precisely “don’t spill the beans too quickly, otherwise they won’t believe you. Put up a sham resistance, and then pretend that it’s all over, calmly, and tell them whatever you know”. And the way they prepare them for that is by giving them as little information as possible, in other words make sure that each individual knows very little, and basically elaborate if you need to, with a bit of imagination to satisfy whatever they want. Because basically, withholding that information just doesn’t help in the end.

Paul Brennan: So there’s no future for the tight-lipped hero?

Derrick Silove: Very little, unfortunately. I think they are more the substance of novels nowadays, rather than reality.

Paul Brennan: Derrick Silove, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of New South Wales.

For many months now, prisoners have been held for interrogation at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. They’ll all Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters and they’re all Muslims. What can we surmise about the vulnerability and resilience of their minds in the face of modern interrogation methods? Dr. Malik Badri is Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur. He’s held academic positions in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, and has also written a book on contemplation in Islam. Dr. Malik Badri describes the ordeals of Bilal, one of Islam’s first political prisoners during the seventh century.

Malik Badri: Bilal was an Ethiopian slave in Mecca. And his master used to, when he accepted Islam and rejected the bowing to their stone carved gods, he was taken in the hot sun and they would put very heavy stones on them and he would beat him and tell him, “just say something to say that you have refused Islam, and say something good about our gods” but he would only repeat the words ahadun ahad, God is only One. And he was able to feel that all the pain that he received was something that would bring him nearer and nearer to God, since he is sacrificing for the sake of God.

Another prisoner in Islamic history, a man who was put in prison a few centuries ago, was Ibn Taymiyyah. And he was put in prison in Cairo, he was from Damascus. Ibn Taymiyyah was very famous for having said the very famous sentence when he was arrested. He said, “What are they going to do to me? If they put me in prison then this is a chance for me for contemplation. If they send me out of the country, to deport me, it would be like tourism. And if they kill me, I will be a martyr. What can they do to me?”

Paul Brennan: Now, while a Muslim warrior can no longer continue his jihad of the sword, in prison he must continue his mental and spiritual jihad. What does this actually involve?

Malik Badri: They say when the Prophet came from a battle, he said to his companions, “We have returned from the small jihad to the major jihad.” They asked him, “What is the major jihad? What is more than what we were doing?” He said, “The jihad of the soul, the jihad of your desires that take you away from God, is a greater jihad. This is the major jihad.” Prayer is very important, the repetition of certain exhortations to Allah is very important. This by itself will bring about a form of relaxation. It can increase the hormones that are related to relaxation, and make the person in a happy state which cannot be described by words.

Paul Brennan: Would a Muslim see their survival in prison as a kind of divine test, a divine lesson?

Malik Badri: Yes indeed. You see, if man can actually transcend himself to a higher level of reality, then indeed, whatever happens to man in terms of something which is painful, can be explained cognitively by him in two ways. Either this is a way by which God is helping him to forgive his sins, or else it is a way by which God elevates his position spiritually. So people who are in prison, who have this kind of conception, will actually be able to tolerate their imprisonment very well. And they can see that the prison is something which God has sent them in order to improve their status.

Paul Brennan: Now, while solitary confinement can separate every single prisoner from every other prisoner, do you think in some way they can communicate through something like a common heart or a common spirit?

Malik Badri: People when they are in prison, and when they are in solitary confinement, it seems that their psychic ability will be sharpened. I have known of a number of cases in which people who came out of prison, they would say they would actually know about what is happening in their homes, by their dreams. And at times, while they are awake, they would get this kind of – what we call inspiration. I feel that those people who have a belief in a hereafter, and the ability actually to communicate, these people are the ones who can tolerate quite a lot of psychological stress in prison. Even they can tolerate physical stress which does interfere chemically with their brains.

Paul Brennan: How can they spiritually transcend a truth drug?

Malik Badri: When it comes to the chemical, then the bodies of all people are the same. We must say that even we, in the field of psychiatry, we are using these drugs already. And a patient who has a lot of pent up feelings, maybe he has secrets which he cannot say to the doctor, is given a drug at times, and this drug will make him speak. This is what is known as catharsis, or abreaction, and in this sense we are actually using something which can also be used in prisons, to let those in prison who know certain information, can bring it up. Modern technology has actually been able, and modern medicine and modern biochemistry, if used in this manner, it can actually wreck anybody.

Paul Brennan: Dr. Malik Badri, Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur.


So there it is: according to one interrogator, one psychiatrist and one Muslim psychologist, all human beings, when subject to the vast battery of interrogation techniques, can be threatened, bribed or just pharmaceutically steered into spilling the beans. This surely dispels forever the romantic vision of the human mind as the resilient repository of the sacred self. The biotechnologies of interrogation, it seems, are heralding the post-human future, where your mind is not necessarily your own.

David Rutledge: Paul Brennan there, reporting on military interrogation.

Whoa...room 101 anyone? No mind will ever truly be hidden...that is a scary thought.

 

[Ender]

I'm sorry ... you said that they did not condemn the acts. But in the very article I referred to, there was a variant of the word 'condemn' at least twice.

I can only assume that you did not expose yourself to the report because a) you do not know how or b) you do not care to know another point of view.

In this very thread, it has been pointed out that reports of prisoner abuse from the International Committee of the Red Cross come from more than 10 detention facilities in Iraq, yet some continue to put forth the arguement that it was just a 'few bad apples'. I suppose my type gets frustrated when people choose to remain unaware of what is going on around them.

Mike

No, your type is the type who likes to pontificate and play loose with the facts. You turn "allegations" into facts to support your arguments and your type cites biased sources like NPR, etc. The type who likes to ramble off on tangents, then when confronted with the real facts your type then resorts to name calling, condenscention,and blustering... But I'm on to you now....best wishes.

 

[michaeledward]

No, your type is the type who likes to pontificate and play loose with the facts. You turn "allegations" into facts to support your arguments and your type cites biased sources like NPR, etc. The type who likes to ramble off on tangents, then when confronted with the real facts your type then resorts to name calling, condenscention,and blustering... But I'm on to you now....best wishes.

What 'Fact' was I playing loose with?

What sources have you cited, biased or otherwise?

 

[Tgace]

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/27-05092004-297165.html

Interesting article...

Miller, now in charge of the Iraq detention system, said Saturday that he had not recommended that military police participate in interrogations. Rather, he believed they could be more useful to interrogators in a passive role of relaying information they picked up from prisoners' conversations.

Miller said in his earlier report it was "essential that the guard force be actively engaged in setting the conditions" for more fruitful interrogations of what he called Iraqi "internees."

An Army investigative report by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, which he based in part on Miller's assessment of the situation in Iraq in September, took issue with Miller's approach to the challenges in Iraq.

Taguba suggested that Miller was wrong to use the situation at Guantanamo Bay - where the prisoners are suspected terrorists with possible links to those who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks - as a template for Iraq, where the prisoners are Saddam Hussein loyalists and common criminals.

Some lawmakers say there are clear indications from the widely published photos of Army MPs abusing Iraqi prisoners that even if such acts were not ordered or condoned by U.S. commanders, the soldiers thought they were at least condoned.

 

[MJS]

Yes but... in all reality isn't that exactly what that is? A personal Attack by Nick Berg's father on President Bush? Unfortuantley, regardless of George Jr's f-ups, In Nick Berg's case the president had nothing to do with it... Nick Berg was not "Sent there" he chose to go, I recall reading that he considered going a... what did they say... rush? thrill? somthing along those lines... We know how far out you are, so of course instead of seeing that you use it as ammo against the Administration you claim to be brought up so strongly to believe in.

Thats true. When you're in the service, you are forced to go regardless of if you like it or not. I didnt see anyone force Berg to go.

I continue to be amazed by the utter failure on the part of YOU to recognize--or to admit, perhaps-- that most everyone here has said we went too far... But no... all you can hear with your own ego stroking going on about how you are brought up better than the rest of us is "YAY, LETS TORTURE RAGHEADS FOR FUN!" (Pardon the expression, but I feel like that is what Robert thinks of us)

Again, true! Seems to me that all he sees is what WE have done. How about what THEY have done?????

Well Sir, if you wish for people to stop reiterating that notion, you have but to ADDRESS people's questions directed at you, instead of going off on some tangent that does not answer what you were asked. I know focus is a big deal... but can you try it before complaining people claim you have none?

Yes. And I'm am STILL waiting for a reply to my question. Robert, if you dont have an answer, just admit it. Its ok to be wrong you know. We're all human.

This is the notion that has the situation completely ATFU. AMERICA didn't do those things... SOME PEOPLE DID. PEOPLE are failible, and as such, PEOPLE DO THINGS WRONG. PEOPLE, angry, sad, vengeful, or just plain MEAN did what they did because they were facing an Enemy who's NATION felt it was ok... I'm sorry to hurt your moral feelings, but AMERICA still is better. Why can I say that? Because Instead of celebrating this evil those INDIVIDUALS did, we are looking to punish them... not dancing in the streets and cheering. But you don't believe that.

Another good point. I made referrence to this very same thing in a post.

Haha, theres that LSD again making you think we said things we didnt.

:boing2:

Wow. Nice Ego. Does it come with a display case or do you just take it out and show it to people?

:boing2:

Maybe you read too much. try living... OUTSIDE of a book. The notion "that a martial artist shows restraint and compassion at all times, and never bullies" is a nice one... and it is, I agree, (OMG we agree on somthing???) the most commonly taught... but it is NOT the only notion taught. Add to that, ONCE AGAIN that people are failible, and well... Keep in mind, Robert, the "martial" in martial arts refers to fighting, combat and warfare... and durring a fight, only being "honorable and moral" leads to one thing... and its not "going home safley" after the battle is over.

I dont see it happening. He'll most likely make a referrence to the, as he calls it.."Fantasy" that we all live in! I have also made referrences to him regarding SD, the arts, as well as fighting. Sorry to say, its like :deadhorse cuz he just doesnt get it!

Mike

 

[michaeledward]

Robert--Would you care to enlighten us to your solutions as how you think the situation should be solved??

Mike

Speaking for myself (and, obviously, not for Robert), there is no way to handle this situation well. And with each passing day, the United States is putting itself in a worse position.

How I would handle this situation is to get the hell out of Iraq. As soon as possible (by the way, on 1/27/04 I voted for Dennis Kucinich because this is also his position).

We could turn Iraq over to ali-Sistani. This would no doubt lead to a civil war in Iraq, al-Sadr's militia vs ali-Sistani. Once Sistani put the beating on al-Sadr, we would then see some ethnic cleansing as the Shi-ite pay back the Sunni's for 3 decades of oppression (or is that 3 centuries). The Kurds would break from Iraq, and there might be a struggle with Turkey for a while; which might require NATO's participation (shouldn't that organization terminate itself now that the Soviet Union is 10 years past dead?)

If we were no longer involved in Iraq, we could focus our efforts on true security measures for US citizens. The only security Iraq is providing us is the 'Fly-Paper' project, it is drawing all the terrorists to the easy targets (US Military) in Iraq. This will lead to an inescapable escalation of violence.

Wasn't it Saddam Hussein who predicted that an invasion of Iraq would be just like Vietnam? Weren't we all told by our leaders that there was no way Iraq could be like Vietnam?

Oh, well.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Speaking for myself (and, obviously, not for Robert), there is no way to handle this situation well. And with each passing day, the United States is putting itself in a worse position.

Well, I just simply said that because it seems like no matter what we're doing, it isnt good enough in his eyes. I was simply looking for what his example of doing things right would be.

How I would handle this situation is to get the hell out of Iraq. As soon as possible (by the way, on 1/27/04 I voted for Dennis Kucinich because this is also his position).

We could turn Iraq over to ali-Sistani. This would no doubt lead to a civil war in Iraq, al-Sadr's militia vs ali-Sistani. Once Sistani put the beating on al-Sadr, we would then see some ethnic cleansing as the Shi-ite pay back the Sunni's for 3 decades of oppression (or is that 3 centuries). The Kurds would break from Iraq, and there might be a struggle with Turkey for a while; which might require NATO's participation (shouldn't that organization terminate itself now that the Soviet Union is 10 years past dead?)

If we were no longer involved in Iraq, we could focus our efforts on true security measures for US citizens. The only security Iraq is providing us is the 'Fly-Paper' project, it is drawing all the terrorists to the easy targets (US Military) in Iraq. This will lead to an inescapable escalation of violence.

Good points!! I've said the same thing in the past. IMO, we get involved in way too much stuff that we shouldnt! If there is some country that wants to run around in the streets with guns, and shoot people...who the hell cares???? Let em kill each other!! As long as they are not doing anything to effect the USA, then why the hell should we care. Now, the first war, when they invaded Saudi...well, thats different. We're allies with that country and its a source of oil, so yeah, I could see defending it. But some of these other places.....stay the hell out!! Less trouble on our end. Many times, those people dont want us there anyway, so why bother to go??????

Wasn't it Saddam Hussein who predicted that an invasion of Iraq would be just like Vietnam? Weren't we all told by our leaders that there was no way Iraq could be like Vietnam?

yup.

Mike

 

[Cruentus]

I finally watched that video, and it was pretty horrific. My adrenaline was up during when they were reading in arabic. Then, they moved to cut his head off....and there was very little blood.

So, I was like, wait a second? If you know anything about the effects of the blade on the human body, you know that if you sever a jugular, blood spays everywhere at about 120 pounds of pressure. This was not the case at all with this video.

So...puzzled more then horrified at this point, I watched it again. I noticed the times are all differen't. The clock changes from real time to military time, and it appears to span over 11 or so hours, jumping back and forth. The head they hold up looks pale, like he was already dead, not just had been killed. His movements while he is kneeling, and even when the terrorists throw him down, upon scrutiny, are not very natural. It's almost like he was already dead or something. Add that with the grainyness of the video, and the fact that the audio isn't in sync with the video, and the details of this thing....I don't know, it ain't right though.

I am not saying that Berg wasn't killed, or that this is some big consperacy or something. I am just saying that it ain't right. This looks like a cut and paste, hack editing job. I am not in denial over the horrific act, as I can stomach these things well. It just doesn't seem "real."

Something is definatily wrong, here. I just got in from a meeting, saw it, and posted here...haven't had time to check the news. Has the media picked up on this yet (I mean, credable news sources)?

 

[loki09789]

I finally watched that video, and it was pretty horrific. My adrenaline was up during when they were reading in arabic. Then, they moved to cut his head off....and there was very little blood.

So, I was like, wait a second? If you know anything about the effects of the blade on the human body, you know that if you sever a jugular, blood spays everywhere at about 120 pounds of pressure. This was not the case at all with this video.

So...puzzled more then horrified at this point, I watched it again. I noticed the times are all differen't. The clock changes from real time to military time, and it appears to span over 11 or so hours, jumping back and forth. The head they hold up looks pale, like he was already dead, not just had been killed. His movements while he is kneeling, and even when the terrorists throw him down, upon scrutiny, are not very natural. It's almost like he was already dead or something. Add that with the grainyness of the video, and the fact that the audio isn't in sync with the video, and the details of this thing....I don't know, it ain't right though.

I am not saying that Berg wasn't killed, or that this is some big consperacy or something. I am just saying that it ain't right. This looks like a cut and paste, hack editing job. I am not in denial over the horrific act, as I can stomach these things well. It just doesn't seem "real."

Something is definatily wrong, here. I just got in from a meeting, saw it, and posted here...haven't had time to check the news. Has the media picked up on this yet (I mean, credable news sources)?

Good, I am not the only one with suspicions on this won. I can rationalize the grey face thing as shock reaction drawing blood into the body core, and the body reaction as catatonic state induced by shock.... but the blood issue really isn't right to me either.

It really looks like he was already dead/nearly dead. If his heart was pumping under the fight or flight condition, there would be a lot more pooling and shooting blood. The time inconsistency could be explained away as an edit because cutting through the neck with all the bones, ligaments, tendons, windpipe... needless to say that knife wasn't the most efficient tool for the job.

It does look funny though. I wonder why no statement about that from medical experts has come out yet. I mean we are just laymen and noticed it.

 

[MJS]

I finally watched that video, and it was pretty horrific. My adrenaline was up during when they were reading in arabic. Then, they moved to cut his head off....and there was very little blood.

So, I was like, wait a second? If you know anything about the effects of the blade on the human body, you know that if you sever a jugular, blood spays everywhere at about 120 pounds of pressure. This was not the case at all with this video.

So...puzzled more then horrified at this point, I watched it again. I noticed the times are all differen't. The clock changes from real time to military time, and it appears to span over 11 or so hours, jumping back and forth. The head they hold up looks pale, like he was already dead, not just had been killed. His movements while he is kneeling, and even when the terrorists throw him down, upon scrutiny, are not very natural. It's almost like he was already dead or something. Add that with the grainyness of the video, and the fact that the audio isn't in sync with the video, and the details of this thing....I don't know, it ain't right though.

I am not saying that Berg wasn't killed, or that this is some big consperacy or something. I am just saying that it ain't right. This looks like a cut and paste, hack editing job. I am not in denial over the horrific act, as I can stomach these things well. It just doesn't seem "real."

Something is definatily wrong, here. I just got in from a meeting, saw it, and posted here...haven't had time to check the news. Has the media picked up on this yet (I mean, credable news sources)?

Ahhh...something else very interesting. I was reading in the paper the very same thing that you just said, regarding the times on the tape. I mean, even all of the tapes that come out with Osama supposedly talking on them. What is the first thing that they do?? They analize the tape to see if its actually him!!! These guys love to mess with you and keep you thinking. And now that you mention it Paul, you bring up a good point with the severed head and the blood.

Mike