CIA lied over "brutal" interrogations

[cngodltlbi]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30401100

Prh47bridge …… I’d said I’d finished here but you have picked up on “they are going to do what they are going to do” – apparently assuming there are mainly innocent people, with no intent but tortured, is snatched from their homes, possibly from a western suburb, and that this outrage encourages more people to join the terrorists. Hmmm.

So may I expand on your moral outrage, with sympathies bound within their religion, what do you think MORALLY attracts the many tens of thousands that actually join ISIS (and similar Islamist groups) and the many hundreds of thousands globally that support these groups, in one way or another?

“ISIS's 'Slavery for Dummies': Jihadists compile chilling checklist of how to treat thousands of kidnapped sex slaves”
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2867179/ISIS-s-Slavery-Dummies-Jihadists-compile-chilling-checklist-treat-thousands-kidnapped-sex-slaves.html
• Document explains in sickening detail who can be made a sex slave
• Outlines exactly when a captured woman can be beaten by her 'owner', and when it is justified to rape prepubescent girls
• Up to 5,000 women are held as sex slaves in ISIS' horrific prison-brothels
• Majority of them are Yazidi women and children captured back in August

“As US tears itself apart over torture of terrorists, let's just remember who we're up against: ISIS throws man off roof to his death for being gay”
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2868419/Thrown-roof-gay-ISIS-release-chilling-new-images-brutal-execution-man-guilty-sodomy.html
• An Islamic court ruled that he should be flung from the highest building
• They posted the graphic images on a jihadist website
• It is unknown whether the man died instantly from his injuries
• This is the third execution for homosexuality in less than a month
• WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT

There is a very good chance that this Senate Report in the U.S. on mainly the Republican Bush era, was politically put together by a Democrat Party, who has just lost the Senate to the Republicans – so how effective the torture was, we may never really know - but judged by the (lack of) terrorist attacks since 9/11 on the U.S., the ‘collective’ U.S. intelligence actions must be doing something right.

Finally, let us remember that the prospective Jihadists looking to martyr themselves are counting on a quick death, usually by vest bomb or a bullet in action, so IMO to the unsure teetering on the edge of action, the prospects of being held by the security services and interrogated ‘with extreme prejudice’, is also a deterrent.

And that our security services in order to stop terrorism, that could be in any domestic home, needs to be proactive, rather than reactive.

It's sickening what one group of people will do to another, Isitmebut.

However, staying with the CIA torture, it clearly hasn't prevented ISIS from committing its atrocities. Can you find any proof of anything it has prevented?

It's really hard to prove a negative, so I suppose we will, as usual, simply have to fall back on what we believe, rather than know, about terrorism. Maybe you believe torturing people makes others less likely to want to be terrorists? I don't think so. No proof, either way.

So if we can't be sure, either way, I would prefer the CIA not to torture people. I especially don't want them to do it and then tell me they did it to protect me. Not in my name!

I sort of wish we did torture but only for the convicted baddies. They deserve pain.

Solopower .... of course torture can not stop any Islamist organization, especially in other countries conducting a 'holy war', but that is not the objective of gathering market intel, whether through torture or not.

Due to how security services work, I cannot tell you how many lives have ever been saved by torture, as you cannot deny that our security services are not stopping many threats against its citizens every year - unless you believe no Islamist or other terrorist is no longer looking to attack us and our 'infidel' way of life.

Re my theory of the deterrent of torture, you are correct I don't know, but if I was a domestic terrorist knowing my country will no longer interrogate me with 'vigour', and from now on without offering me tea and biscuits on demand - I'd be thinking Christmas (whatever) came early.

We are fighting a domestic and foreign threat that believes their religion trumps everything, including the human rights of everyone else, and although they rarely wear uniforms, they ARE combatants ONCE they turn to the 'dark side'.

And while I believe EVERY EFFORT should be made to ensure they don't 'tun', unless someone can tell me the moral logic why they would aspire to joining ISIS etc in the first place, we have to assume once radicalized, that they are a threat - so domestically security services have to be on top of it, by whatever means, including asking them nicely 'are you, or anyone you know, a threat'. Hmmm.

I'm ok with killing the enemy. That's what you do in wars and we long ago decided that was necessary.

Not sure how well threats of torture will work on someone willing to blow themselves up, but if it worked and was the only way then perhaps it could be right.

But you know they don't just torture terrorists. They torture people to find out if they are terrorists.

And one more thing. If it's supposed to be a deterrent as some have said and if it's been decided that it's right to do it then why is it lied about? If it's the right thing to do then it should be open and laws should be passed allowing it. None of this creeping around doing it on foreign soil to avoid scrutiny.

Apparently we send people to other countries to be tortured to keep our hands clean. What kind of cowardly attitude is that?

Isitmebut, we managed to win WW2 without resorting to torture. We managed to find peace in Northern Ireland without resorting to torture. This report has pages and pages and pages of evidence to back up the fact that no lives were saved by torture and no useful intelligence gained.

The plots the CIA claimed to have discovered/averted by torture were actually detected and prevented from coming off by proper investigation using conventional methods.

I dunno, it's almost as if some guys in the CIA actually wanted to torture people... maybe they've seen too many films. Or just wanted an outlet for their anger.

edamsavestheday .... re "we managed to win WW2 without resorting to torture. We managed to find peace in Northern Ireland without resorting to torture."

I think you are rather naive if you believe that, we should leave it there.

As to 'conventional methods', what should we do when the internet can 'turn' fine Muslim family oriented youngsters who were looking to become doctors and save lives, but then run off to join ISIS - bug every Muslim (or in the past Irish) home?

I totally respect Islam and even envy the Muslim (family) close way of life, where do we start to look?

As I have said before, Islamists are stateless, so how 'conventionally' can we tell WHAT in whatever country is winding up a UK Muslim, and then infiltrate close/closed communities???

I do not condone torture, I was no fan of Blair/Labour, but the 2000's for whatever western reasons, posed many western threats - and I just don't think we should exclude any security services methods, especially in such times.

In heightened times of crisis, time will be of the essence in trying to work out the scope of threat a country faces.

The west is currently having a serious row with Russia/Putin, the man is sending ships and plans into NATO areas, how many Russians are currently being tortured? I'd suggest none, we can use 'conventional means' to gather intelligence.

When domestic threats appear, when your own citizens just 'appear' and we get the 7/7 tube/bus bombings, how do you tell how many others might do the same, but governments have the duty to protect their citizens, and this may mean getting intel with what they believe at the time, the quickest route.

No, I did not assume they are mainly innocent people. But if you torture people you will inevitably torture some innocent people. Yes, many terrorists will become terrorists regardless of whether or not we torture. But if we torture some people will join the terrorists or support them who otherwise would not have done so. There is plenty of evidence for this.

Yes, absolutely governments have the duty to protect their citizens. That is why they should not torture. It does not work. There is plenty of evidence that it does not work and is counter productive. There is not a shred of evidence that it does.

I want evidence-based policies as far as possible. And the evidence-based policy here is that you should not torture people. Your post is full of assumptions. If you look at the evidence you would find that many of your assumptions are false.

Why not simply surrender to ISIS or some similar group and let them run this country? That would stop the 'war' wouldn't it?

I assume the argument would be that we wouldn't like to live in a country where people are treated in such a degrading and disgusting manner.

But if we become them then what's the difference? It will be just as bad here anyway.

There have been hundreds of innocent men tortured in Guantanamo on no charge and then released, some years later, including children. I think it's disgusting.
Shaker Amer is an interesting case.

Anyone can be picked up and taken in 'rendition'. My husband My father My brother. Any of them could be taken and never ever returned based on someone who was tortured giving false information. Or maybe because they looked a bit dodgy or they went toPakistan or they were seen reading a religious book. Plenty of innocent men have been taken

Getting intel by 'the quickest route' ie torture is highly ineffective. The 'Israeli example' link cited by the CIA is a reminder that torture is ineffective. The 'Israeli example' is one that the world must not follow if we want humanity to remain intact. In fact the human rights organisation in Israel has worked hard to get the argument supporting torture thrown out of court.

To argue the other side there could be times you would torture someone.

Suppose you raid a place and find 5 people with backpacks full of explosives, but you know there were 6 there earlier. The 6th might be on their way to blow something up.

In this instance there's no question of the 5 being innocent and there's little time.

Mostly though we are talking about someone who might be guilty or something or not.

Wait a min. The CIA torturing people was done after 9/11 and way before IS/ISIS was around. So arguing that torturing the Taliban has clearly not had the desired effect of killing the bad guys. In fact what we have now is a group so bad that even the Taliban don't want to be associated with them!

In fact, had the US not invaded Iraq to find non-existent terrorists and weapons of mass destruction then interfered in Syria to try & effect regime change then I'm pretty sure that ISIS wouldn't have gotten powerful enough to reach a critical mass.

When ISIS first rolled into Iraq, it was the 'highly trained' Iraqi army than ran away leaving all their brand spanking new US equipment behind that ISIS have been able to use.

But coming back to torture, two wrongs do not make a right. You can't go around torturing people just because you deem them to be bad people.

If it were say a US/UK citizen blowing up a church, would torture be justifiable to find out who else he worked with? I don't think anyone would think it is. Yet if that person is from another country then somehow that makes it OK?

We managed to find peace in Northern Ireland without resorting to torture.

Nope. Torture victims in NI are pressing for their case to be reopened - originally the European Court of Human Rights found the UK guilty of inhumane and degrading treatment, not torture. But this month Cabinet documents from the 70s have been released in which senior ministers admit to using torture on republican suspects. Didn't work, of course - the IRA switched organisational structure and the campaign continued for another 20 odd years.

Been teaching a class today about British counter-insurgency in Ireland in the 1920s - ripping out of finger nails, burning eyelids, false executions and severe beatings were rife.

I know, Janine. Our record is pretty bad too. Which is why we have to work to make it better and never condone torture. How can we tell others not to do it, when we do it ourselves?

Rather than torture people for information, we need to try to understand the anger, the conditions, the mindset, the beliefs that have created this situation in the first place. Most importantly, our leaders need to get a grip on what exactly they are dealing with. I don't mean where the next attack is going to come from, but why people are doing these things. As I said above, no-one can do anything to combat religious fanaticism - except create the conditions that reduce the numbers of young people who become fanatics. We can kill as many as possible, but they will still keep coming if we do that. Torture just makes us look evil and gives them a reason to hate us.

That's what I mean, Niceguy. The torturing that went on after 9/11 didn't prevent ISIS from forming, and you're right, the information gained by torture may even have played a part in America's decision to invade Iraq, which we now know to have been such a mistake.

If I was a terrorist and had been captured by the CIA, I would deliberately feed them wrong information. Wouldn't you? So how can the CIA be sure that anything they gain that way can be relied upon?

This whole report makes the CIA torturers appear not only evil but stupid and uninformed. I really hope they have actually managed to prevent some attacks. Otherwise I'd be wondering if the world would be a safer place without them??

Liberian friend informs Langley...

s9.postimg.org/xza6zbv8v/mnd.jpg

Ex-CIA operative "Thomas" lights up a cigar and likes to think about old times when 30 years ago being a good op he enjoyed the beauties of Africa. Back then he was young, enthusiastic and full of ambition, very curious, self-motivated and keen on adventures...

Liberia, the first republic on the Dark Continent, was tearing apart by a longstanding civil war. And traditionally the U.S. considered the country as sphere of its national interests and at least aimed to control the situation there, if not to rule the country.

In the 90s the CIA had agents in almost every faction involved in the major ethnic conflict. And the most important assets were those men who had a close contact with Liberia's President and the country's government to report sensible information about their plans so the White House could pull the trigger.

Brownie Jeffrey Samukai was among those agents who until 1994 was close to Dr. Amos Claudius Sawyer, the President of the Interim Government of National Unity in Liberia, and enjoyed his trust. After service in the Armed Forces Samukai held a number of senior positions which included Deputy Minister of Defense for Operations, in 1993-94 he served as commander of the Black Berets, in 1994-95 he was a director of the Liberian National Police. Samukai was CIA's valuable asset who got a solid pay-off. To keep control over the agent his supervisors rolled over for him. During the civil war escalation Samukai demanded to ensure his personal and his family's security. At the same time, with the help from CIA he developed his business projects and opened Exsecon security firm.

In the 90s resident agents "Jim" and "Dutch" in Monrovia engaged with Samukai. "Thomas" gave a friendly steer and asked not to publish their real names. The all-important meetings with the agent were always held by chief figures of the CIA station there.

Even after President Sawyer left his post and the following annual change of Liberian leaders, Washington supported its voluntary assistant waterborne with the help of other valuable agents. As the result Samukai "outlived" a lot of Liberian Presidents and even worked in the U.N. In 2006 he became Minister of National Defense of Liberia as part of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf's Cabinet.

In the agent's profile in Langley it is marked that Brownie Samukai assisted in the arrest of former Liberia's President Charles Taylor and bringing him to the U.N. International Tribunal. Agent informed the CIA of every detail about arms dealers and their business, natural resources deals and drug dealing. A special concern in the U.S. was raised by Samukai's information about relationship between Charles Taylor and Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. Among other Samukai's merits are eliminating of his compatriots who interfered with U.S. plans in Liberia.

And the last feather in our hero's cap...

In the mentioned profile there is mark about excessive loyalty of Brownie Samukai to the U.S. You can ask him if it was the real display of "love" or not... but there're no doubts in valuable agent's inventiveness and adroitness. By "collecting points" Samukai declared his love to American intelligence and implored his supervisor to send him a book "From the Shadows" by former CIA chief Robert Gates.

As "Thomas" said, the acquisition of agents like Samukai is possible with the help of the DIA that cooperate with the CIA through a special link as a part of collaboration with foreign military departments. Here is where the CIA and DIA work together on the same goal, but play different roles.

The DIA officers in a foreign land regularly meet with partners and the most promising are invited to the U.S. for sharing experience. Further they examine candidate's psychological condition and determine their recruiting sensitivity. If successful, new agents receive further instructions from the CIA's handlers under the diplomatic disguise in the country of residence.

Apparently, the recruits of higher rank are more essential for the U.S. intelligence.

However, "Thomas" does not consider Samukai's hooking as something exceptional for the CIA. Hiring top ranking officials in Africa was always a trivial thing among professionals in the U.S. intelligence...

"Thomas" knows a lot about African agents of ministerial rank. He saw how the CIA works from the first raw of the seats, including the enrolment of former Zaire's Minister of Defense Honore Ngbanda-Nzambo Ko Atumba. But he will tell us about that later...

Watch all four videos from this woman. It's no accident and innocent people are DELIBERATELY targeted.