‘Torture memos’: What do they really reveal?
Did harsh interrrogation of al Qaida operatives glean valuable information? While Bush administration and CIA officials say plots were disrupted, other inteliigence officials dispute those claims.
President Obama has “acted courageously and wisely,” said The Washington Post in an editorial. By releasing—and repudiating—four Bush-era Justice Department memos that gave the CIA legal license to sadistically interrogate suspected terrorists, he has restored some of this nation’s lost “moral authority.” To read these “nauseating” documents is “to take a journey into depravity,” said The New York Times. In “the precise bureaucratese favored by dungeon masters throughout history,” Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel ruled that CIA interrogators could slam prisoners against walls, confine them in cramped, dark boxes, keep them standing with their arms handcuffed over their heads for endless hours of agony, and deprive them of sleep for up to 11 days. Waterboarding, the terrifying, simulated drowning technique favored by the Nazis, North Koreans, and medieval torturers, also was permissible, since no one actually was drowned.
If you actually read these memos in historical context, said Rich Lowry in National Review Online, they should be “a source of pride.” Carefully reasoned, the memos “represent a nation of laws struggling to defend itself against a savage, lawless enemy while adhering to its legal commitments and norms.” In all cases, Bush’s legal team mandated that the techniques not inflict “severe physical or mental pain or suffering.” When detainees were “walled,” for example, the documents required that they be thrown against fake, flexible walls, with their necks buttressed by towels to prevent whiplash. “Not exactly Torquemada.” More important, the interrogation methods worked—and saved American lives, said former Bush speechwriter Marc A. Thiessen in The Washington Post. The CIA has repeatedly reported that it obtained critical information through the harsh interrogation of top al Qaida operatives Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah. Mohammed revealed details of a “Second Wave” of attacks that included a plot to fly a plane into a Los Angeles skyscraper, while Zubaydah provided a very useful list of al Qaida operatives and plots.
How do we know this is true? asked Dan Froomkin in Washingtonpost.com. Bush administration and CIA officials “in full CYA mode” are not reliable sources about what torture actually yielded, and their assertions about disrupted plots have been repeatedly disputed by other intelligence officials. Just this week, several intelligence officials told The New York Times that Zubaydah actually gave up everything he knew before the torture began. If waterboarding and torture were so effective, said Andrew Sullivan in TheAtlantic.com, why was Zubaydah ultimately waterboarded 83 times, and Mohammed 183 times? Well, now we know. Intelligence officials revealed this week that Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were desperate for Zubaydah and Mohammed to provide “proof of the links between al Qaida and Iraq” that would have justified the Iraq war. Alas, the al Qaida operatives could not help them, even when reduced to babbling, broken men pleading for their lives.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
To settle this debate, said Timothy Rutten in the Los Angeles Times, we need a bipartisan “truth commission” that can finally determine what information torture produced, and at what cost. Someday, terrorists will again attack this country. “If it occurs in the absence of a clear historical record of what the Bush/Cheney torture policies did or did not accomplish,” torture’s defenders will charge that “Americans died because their soft-headed countrymen were preoccupied with civil liberties and human rights.” So let’s get answers.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Dresden: on the trail of a Romantic icon in Germany
the week recommends The Saxon city celebrates the 250th birthday of Caspar David Friedrich this year
By The Week UK Published
-
5 tremendously trending cartoons on the TikTok showdown
Cartoons Artists take on Chinese influence, privacy concerns, and more
By The Week US Published
-
Recipe: nasi goreng spicy fried rice
The Week Recommends Perfect for weeknights, this gluten-free twist on Indonesian fried rice is 'oh-so-good'
By The Week UK Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Xi-Biden meeting: what's in it for both leaders?
Today's Big Question Two superpowers seek to stabilise relations amid global turmoil but core issues of security, trade and Taiwan remain
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Will North Korea take advantage of Israel-Hamas conflict?
Today's Big Question Pyongyang's ties with Russia are 'growing and dangerous' amid reports it sent weapons to Gaza
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published