CIA details it's use of torture: waterboarding worse in practice than in training

[CptStern]

There has been some confusion for years over what exactly "waterboarding" has meant in practice. Does it induce the sensation of drowning? Or does it actually replicate it? The differences between the two may seem academic, but the CIA inspector general report on torture says that the way the agency practiced waterboarding was different from the way U.S. troops were taught to endure it at Survival Evasion Resistance Escape (SERE) schools and different from what the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel thought it was approving in mid-2002.


OIG's [Office of the Inspector General's] review of the videotapes revealed that the waterboard technique employed at [REDACTED] was different from the technique as described in the DoJ opinion and used in the SERE training. The difference was in the manner in which the detainee's breathing was obstructed. At the SERE School and in the DoJ opinion, the subject's airflow is disrupted by the firm application of a damp cloth over the air passages; the interrogator applies a small amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner. By contest, the Agency interrogator [REDACTED] continuously applied large volumes of water to a cloth that covered the detainee's mouth and nose. One of the psychologists/interrogators acknowledged that the Agency's use of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and explained that the Agency's technique is different because it is "for real" and is more poignant and convincing.

TLDR: CIA reveals they didnt follow torture manuals when using waterboarding; their use was much more severe than what was allowable in training guidelines

OIG saw 183 waterboarding applications, "most of which" lasted less than 10 seconds, presumably because when the CIA performed waterboarding, it was "too real" for someone to withstand. One of the detainees to undergo the treatment, 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, said he would "make up stories" so the torture would stop, thereby defeating the ostensible intelligence-gathering purpose of the technique

more "effective" torture leads to less effective intel. oh the irony



here is the Inspector Gneral's report on CIA torture:

http://washingtonindependent.com/56175/the-2004-cia-inspector-generals-report-on-torture

this should finally silence all those detractors who say the US doesnt use torture:

CIA interrogators threatened to rape family members of terror suspects, execute their kids, even torture them with an electric drill, official documents released today show, as the US Attorney General announced a probe.

it's hard to tell who the terrorists are

http://www.smh.com.au/world/prosecutor-named-to-probe-cia-interrogations-20090825-ewsp.html

 

[Gunner]

 

[<RJMC>]

if the point of the torture was to simulate drowning them I guess it was drowning for real isnt?

 

[jet_porkins]

CIA interrogators threatened to rape family members of terror suspects, execute their kids, even torture them with an electric drill, official documents released today show, as the US Attorney General announced a probe.

Wat?

Also, I don't think anyone really believed that the U.S., at present/in modern history, doesn't torture.

 

[jimbo118]

 

[CptStern]

Wat?

Also, I don't think anyone really believed that the U.S., at present/in modern history, doesn't torture.

“This government does not torture people,” - George Bush, Oct 2007

 

[Top Secret]

Ugh, so pathetic.