Detainee Tortured, Says U.S. Official

[swag]

Source: Washington Post

By Bob Woodward
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 14, 2009; Page A01

The top Bush administration official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial has concluded that the U.S. military tortured a Saudi national who allegedly planned to participate in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, interrogating him with techniques that included sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a "life-threatening condition."

"We tortured Qahtani," said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case" for prosecution.

Crawford, a retired judge who served as general counsel for the Army during the Reagan administration and as Pentagon inspector general when Dick Cheney was secretary of defense, is the first senior Bush administration official responsible for reviewing practices at Guantanamo to publicly state that a detainee was tortured.

Crawford, 61, said the combination of the interrogation techniques, their duration and the impact on Qahtani's health led to her conclusion. "The techniques they used were all authorized, but the manner in which they applied them was overly aggressive and too persistent. . . . You think of torture, you think of some horrendous physical act done to an individual. This was not any one particular act; this was just a combination of things that had a medical impact on him, that hurt his health. It was abusive and uncalled for. And coercive. Clearly coercive. It was that medical impact that pushed me over the edge" to call it torture, she said.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011303372.html

[coruscate]

1. ASWESOME NEWS! - Now we can prosecute

It's an atrocious thing, but we all knew torture was going on. Now that we have an admission Obama no longer has a choice not to prosecute.

[HereSince1628]

3. I'll be very surprised if any prosecution is undertaken in the US

Although there are many citizens who recognize the need, the government bodies which must act if something is to be done simply don't have the discipline to do it.

The emerging bipartisan consensus seems to be a commission set-up to call Cheney's reign of terror an aberration done with the best intentions, to forgive the guilty and to urge disgruntled citizens to move on. That won't even be great political show, and certainly it will yield no justice.

[pattmarty]

14. Unfortunately, I and many others agree with your assessment.

[coruscate]

17. I used to have the same attitude

But I'm very skilled at reading the "wind" and it's blowing strongly towards justice. Obama's quote that he's not going to do something was followed by how and why he would.

This qualifies.

The country is in such a deep "funk" that historically speaking, situations like this have caused people to get scapegoated for crap just to satisfy people... but this time we don't need scapegoats, we have guilty parties and very real crimes.

Hang in there ^_^

[HereSince1628]

28. I've hung in quite a long long while already, thank-you.

The current air movement is not as strong as the gentle evening breeze caused by rising air over a newly plowed field after a sunny day in May.
Several years ago there were even political hurricane warnings of impending congressional investigations promising probably prosecution.

If these are the winds of justice, I fear they aren't going to have the umph to turn the blades of the windmill that power the millstone of justice.

Justice may grind slowly, but generally it doesn't go so slow that the rats eat the grain before it's turned to flower.

BTW Welcome to DU.

[calimary]

29. Welcome to DU! John Dean was talking about this on "Countdown with Keith Olbermann"

the other night - about how it could wind up that other nations, including our allies, may determine that something REALLY has to be done, and they'll decide to take it upon themselves to seek justice from the war criminals we insist on sheltering here. If they do that, and John Dean thinks it may actually come to this, then it will be a case of the US being "shamed into taking action." Which he said would be a HUGE international embarrassment to the U.S. - in light of the embarrassment we already suffer because of what's gone on so far that's not been prosecuted. He said there might well come a time when other nations inform America, in effect, that - "if you guys don't pursue justice on this, WE WILL DO IT FOR YOU."

And there's universal jurisdiction for any nation pursuing the prosecution of war crimes. Doesn't matter on whose sovereign territory a war criminal is seeking cover. The magnitude of this type of international crime supercedes all.

Seems to me the thing WE need to do to help build the momentum toward some sort of satisfactory resolution here is to keep up the pressure everywhere we can, with everyone we can. Don't let this issue die. With bush/cheney soon to be out of power, other nations and plaintiffs may suddenly become emboldened to pursue justice and make a real, solid, formal, and legal case for it.

Can you just imagine a few years from now if the US continues to drag its feet, and one fine day cheney suddenly gets plucked off some golf course and "renditioned" to a foreign country to face a war crimes tribunal? Or imagine that happening to bush? I can dream, can't I?

[Judi Lynn]

2. High time someone admitted what we all have known from long ago. Too bad no one can erase

the suffering these people have endured, and restore the years stolen from them, and their health, clearly, and their faith in human beings.

Who WOULDN'T admit to anything to get the torturing to stop? My God.

The _Bush administration has been pure filth from the first day he sat in the stolen Oval Office, and the people he hired are pure filth, as well, criminals. Everyone knows that. Iran-Contra maggots, among them.

May they all burn in hell.

[Solly Mack]

4. Oh well

I'm sure it was done in "good faith"

[dipsydoodle]

5. BBC link to same subject

US agents at Guantanamo Bay tortured a Saudi man suspected of involvement in the 11 September attacks, the official overseeing trials at the camp has said.

Susan Crawford told the Washington Post newspaper that Mohammad al-Qahtani had been left in a "life-threatening condition" after being interrogated.

She said Mr Qahtani had been subjected to sustained periods of cold, isolation and sleep deprivation.

Mr Qahtani remains at Guantanamo, but all charges against him were dropped.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7828126.stm

[Stuart G]

6. But the chimp said the U.S. does not torture....and so did Rice..someone is lying...I wonder who?

Oh, it is ok, they can lie, but Clinton needs to be impeached..

[Stuart G]

7. Perhaps we need to impeach Pelosi?..she is a torture herself..nt.

[bdamomma]

9. Pelosi knew what was going on, there is no way she didn't know

what took place.

[Stuart G]

8. Here are the last two paragraphs of the story...by Woodward

She refers to Judge Crawford who is the top Bush official who is responsible for this story..




"She said Bush was right to create a system to try unlawful enemy combatants captured in the war on terrorism. The implementation, however, was flawed, she said. "I think he hurt his own effort. . . . I think someone should acknowledge that mistakes were made and that they hurt the effort and take responsibility for it."
ad_icon

"We learn as children it's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is for permission," Crawford said. "I think the buck stops in the Oval Office."

[Jackpine Radical]

22. Susan Crawford is a real piece of work herself.

She served as the model for all those jokes about the viciousness and depravity of lawyers. Anything that's too much for her fragile sensibilities must really be despicable.

Look her up on Wikipedia.

[rainy]

10. Has the whole world including us forgotten what Rumsfeld

said about the torture pictures? He said they should never get out as it would destroy the US because the pictures included pictures of rape and murder.
Do you all remember that? Why are we not talking about those pictures too.

[annabanana]

11. because THOSE pictures were never in wide rotation. .

that's why.

[Solly Mack]

12. Sure haven't forgotten. Still waiting on ALL the pictures and videos.

And I'll be waiting forever...I think the missing pictures (& video) were destroyed not too long after members of Congress viewed them....and Congress did view them. Graham commented on what he saw.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2005/07/25/abughraib/

"And here's what Lindsey Graham, the Republican senator from South Carolina, said of the pictures after they were screened for members of Congress last year: "The American public needs to understand we're talking about rape and murder here. We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience... We're talking about rape and murder -- and some very serious charges."

[bigworld]

13. And how much useful information was gotten out of him?

I'd say none.

Contrast that with how we interrogated valuable German POWs in WW2 -- with respect and camaraderie. (The gin helped, too.) And guess what? We got tons of information out of them.

[Robbien]

15. Pentagon: We made 9/11 detainee dance with a man and bark like a dog - so we couldn't prosecute him

Source: Daily Mail UK

The United States does torture, a Pentagon official has admitted for the first time - and that's why the so-called 20th September 11 hijacker was never prosecuted.

'We tortured Qahtani,' Susan Crawford, the Pentagon official overseeing tribunals for detainees being held at Guantanamo Bay, said in an interview.

'His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case' for prosecution, she told the Washington Post.

Military documents show that Mohammed al-Qahtani’s repeated interrogations included prolonged isolation, sleep deprivation, forced nudity and exposure to cold. He was forced to dance with a male interrogator and to act like a dog, obeying such commands as 'stay,' 'come' 'and 'bark.'

. . .

'It was that medical impact that pushed me over the edge' to call it torture, Crawford told the newspaper.

A Pentagon inquiry in 2005 found that the methods were 'degrading and abusive.' Mr. Qahtani’s lawyers at the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York said they left him a broken man who has attempted suicide.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1115723/Pentagon-We-9-11-detainee-dance-man-bark-like-dog-Guantanamo--prosecute-him.html

---

The US media on US torture is pretty sedate compared to what is being revealed in international news.

[WriteDown]

19. Haha...

This isn't exactly what I thought they meant by torture. I was thinking about pulling out finger nails, or breaking bones in the foot. I have no problem with this stuff.

"Military documents show that Mohammed al-Qahtani’s repeated interrogations included prolonged isolation, sleep deprivation, forced nudity and exposure to cold. He was forced to dance with a male interrogator and to act like a dog, obeying such commands as 'stay,' 'come' 'and 'bark.'"

[LynnTheDem]

30. America; the "beacon". The "exceptional".

Not so much.

[merh]

16. And what happens to this man?

How does the Obama admin deal with this?

That is just one of the thousand dilemma's the Obama administration faces. In our justice system, he can't be tried, he is unfit. We made him unfit and if he were tried the evidence tossed out because it is tainted - it was illegally obtained.

So when you open the doors at Gitmo, if some of the detainees cannot leave because of their physical/mental states, what do you do?

How do you ensure that the constitution is followed?

Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield/the commander at Gitmo/Ashcroft all need to be tried for this crime - anyone that authorized should face charges and should be in a place that they have to demand their constitutional rights, their human rights - the rights they denied this man and hundreds like him.

[Hydra]

25. He'll be tried and found guilty

Just like Jose Padilla. Tortured out of his mind and brought to trial to confess things he never did.

[merh]

26. No, he won't

read the article - this one is so fucked up, even bushco people won't bring him to trial.

[Hydra]

27. We'll see

I said the same about Padilla, but they went forward with that. We'll have to hope the Dems in the WH aren't afraid of the "weak on terror" label.

[Joanne98]

18. Modern day torture, small persistance acts that break down the mind and body.

If you went into US prisons, you would see that method everywhere.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

21. yep

:smoke:

[happygoluckytoyou]

20. DONT WORRY...WE ARE THE USA...WE DO WHAT WE WANT...AND APOLOGIZE AFTER WE KILL YOU...sorry man, oops

[nolabels]

23. Making sense out of nonsense is how you figure these freaks out

The story hiding under the story is what interests me. It's really quite obvious that real story is behind the story that seems unreal. The tip off is ALL the clues and how they fit. Why would they show such concern for the victims 9/11 and then no concern for the victims of Katrina. The people who planned 9/11 and the aftermath knew the whole time knowing several layers B.S. would be needed throw people off . Any information obtained by torture is as good as no information at all. So that is exactly why they pick up a bunch of people that have little do with any of it and do that. Scaring or at least trying to scare the shit out of everybody is another clue. Exhibiting a kind of inept helplessness to do anything about all of it is the final tip of the hat to knowing how much of scam it was.

The idea of torturing people to give legitimacy to it is one of B.S aspects of 9/11 and is exactly how the freaks work. They give little care about how or what they do, they just care about achieving the goal they have set in front of them. How many in the mastermind of the plan such as this would be the only thing hard to figure out. My guess, three to six. The rest of the people involved sworn to secrecy and living in a compartmented style of work and life wouldn't or couldn't have believed they were a part of it


Why would they torture people for something that isn't really true? Ans: same reason they would kill many others knocking down a building and starting a war. Increase the drama to escalate control. Think of the calling card they walk around with.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

24. I wish Bob Woodward

could have been clearer on this point. It sounds like they didn't let this guy in a month before the attacks because he was allegedly planning on piloting a plane into a building.

Qahtani was denied entry into the United States a month before the Sept. 11 attacks and was allegedly planning to be the plot's 20th hijacker.

[struggle4progress]

31. Bush administration: 'We tortured Qahtani' (Guardian)

• President expected to issue last-minute pardons
• Politicians risk being arrested and tried abroad
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Vikram Dodd
The Guardian
Thursday 15 January 2009

... Bush can issue a pardon to anyone he chooses between now and leaving office at midday on Tuesday. But lawyers warned yesterday that although such a pardon would prevent the politicians and officials from being prosecuted in the US, they would face the risk of being arrested in other countries, as was President Augusto Pinochet.

Gita Gutierrez, Qahtani's lawyer, said yesterday: "We are all concerned that President Bush will hand out pardons as he leaves office. His closest advisers are those most involved in overseeing torture by US personnel. It may prevent their prosecution in the US but it would not prevent other countries pursuing justice along the lines of Pinochet" ...

Gutierrez, who works for the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents many of Guantánamo's 200-plus inmates, said she thought Qahtani's torture constituted a war crime.

The International Red Cross, the only independent body with access to Guantánamo, does not speak about specific cases, but it said yesterday that in general, acts of torture could amount to war crimes. Red Cross spokesman Simon Schorno said: "The third Geneva convention prohibits any ill treatment of a person held in the context of a conflict" ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/15/guantanamo-bush-administration-torture-qahtani

[IsItJustMe]

32. Tortured 9/11 suspect may never be prosecuted: Pentagon official

Source: AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States may never be able to prosecute an alleged plotter of the September 11, 2001 attacks because he was tortured, a top Pentagon official said in an interview.

Susan Crawford, who is charged with deciding whether to bring Guantanamo detainees to trial, told The Washington Post that US interrogators had tortured Saudi terror suspect Mohammed al-Qahtani.

"We tortured Qahtani," she said, thus becoming the first senior Bush administration official to publicly state that a detainee was tortured.

"His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case" for prosecution said Crawford, who is the convening authority of military commissions, a system established by the administration of President George W. Bush to try unlawful enemy combatants.

Crawford said US military interrogators repeatedly subjected Qahtani, 30, to sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a "life-threatening condition."

"The techniques they used were all authorized, but the manner in which they applied them was overly aggressive and too persistent," she said.

"This was just a combination of things that had a medical impact on him, that hurt his health. It was abusive and uncalled for. And coercive. Clearly coercive. It was that medical impact that pushed me over the edge" to call it torture.

Qahtani, alleged to be the 20th hijacker in the September 11 attacks, was denied entry to the United States one month before the attacks but was captured in Afghanistan and flown to Guantanamo in January 2002.

"There is credible evidence the FBI has had that Qahtani was calling (lead 9/11 hijacker) Mohammed Atta when he arrived in Miami," security analyst Sarah Mendelson told AFP, adding that he could still be brought to trial under such evidence.

"I think it is important to understand that evidence gathered completely separately from harsh interrogation, torture, is the base for bringing a trial against Qahtani," added Mendelson, who directs the human rights and national security project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies....



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090115/wl_afp/usattacksguantanamotorture

---

Looks like people are starting to talk with a new president coming in. Gonna be interesting to see what Obama does with all of this.

People now coming out any saying the word TORTURE. Something I think most people knew all along. No matter what they called it.

[Poll_Blind]

33. ARE YOU TELLING ME BUSH CAUSED ONE OF THE HIJACKERS GO FREE?!?!

  Man, if you think that's loud in ALL CAPS, imagine how loud it's going to be when it's shouted into the ears of that last 30-fucking percent who can't get their heads out their ass and still fellate Bush.

PB

[okiru109]

34. this puts the ball squarely in Obama's court... if his justice dept. doesn't act

the ICC will be forced, too.

do the right thing O!