Abu Zubaydah, the first Osama bin Laden henchman captured by the United States after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, was bloodied and feverish when a C.I.A. security team delivered him to a secret safe house in Thailand for interrogation in the early spring of 2002. …. Within days, Mr. Zubaydah was being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques — he was stripped, held in an icy room and jarred by earsplittingly loud music …Read the article
President Bush pointedly cited the capture and interrogation of Mr. Zubaydah in his speech last Wednesday announcing the transfer of Mr. Zubaydah and 13 others to the American detention center in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. And he used it to call for ratification of the tough techniques employed in the questioning.
But rather than the smooth process depicted by Mr. Bush, interviews with nearly a dozen current and former law enforcement and intelligence officials briefed on the process show, the interrogation of Mr. Zubaydah was fraught with sharp disputes, debates about the legality and utility of harsh interrogation methods, and a rupture between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the C.I.A. that has yet to heal.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Torture being done in our names
I have always thought that torture was something only bad and evil people and governments did. Yet, torture has been done for and by the people of the United States, for the last 5 years. How could 230 years of history be overturned without people protesting and saying that this was wrong? How could our entire military, the CIA and the FBI go along with such a change in who we are and what we stand for without some of them raising objections to what they were seeing being done and being asked to do? According to an article in today’s New York Times many of those involved did object: