Exclusive: Only Three Have Been Waterboarded by CIA

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/11/exclusive-only-.html

November 02, 2007 1:25 PM

Brian Ross and Richard Esposito Report:

For all the debate over waterboarding, it has been used on only three al Qaeda figures, according to current and former U.S. intelligence officials.

As ABC News first reported in September, waterboarding has not been used since 2003 and has been specifically prohibited since Gen. Michael Hayden took over as CIA director.

Officials told ABC News on Sept. 14 that the controversial interrogation technique, in which a suspect has water poured over his mouth and nose to stimulate a drowning reflex as shown in the above demonstration, had been banned by the CIA director at the recommendation of his deputy, Steve Kappes.

Hayden sought and received approval from the White House to remove waterboarding from the list of approved interrogation techniques first authorized by a presidential finding in 2002.

I would guess the real count is at least 100 fold higher than that.

As long as it's for a "good cause" like "protecting" us from torturers.

how many have died in custody?

Of course, according to our "leaders" they all died painless deaths while welcoming "democracy".

Sad. Pathetic. Wrong.

why the fuck would anybody believe this???

:eyes:

Maybe they did it to "only" those three guys (too many as it is, and god knows how many more got waterboarded by foreign operatives after rendition by the CIA), but that would still be illegal under U.S. law if waterboarding is acknowledged by the DoJ to be torture (and I don't see how anyone could credibly argue that it isn't). Even if the CIA has stopped doing it and now prohibits its use (and I find that hard to believe), somebody committed a crime and some very high-level somebodies, probably including Rummy, Cheney and Bush, authorized it.

And that's why Mukasey can't/won't say waterboarding is torture. Because he would be implicitly saying the Bushies and people acting under their direction committed a serious crime. And we have to assume he was told in no uncertain terms that his nomination would be withdrawn if he said that. I think the real issue is protecting their sorry asses for what has already happened, even more than what they might be authorized to do in the future.

Human rights groups are gunning for these guys, as well they should. I'm sure Dick and George and Don don't want to find themselves in the dock at The Hague.

I, however, would rejoice to see that happen.

They're just get around a lot.

And, besides, they were al qaeda and they deserved it. Uh, and we knew they were "al qaeda" how? Because they admitted it when we drowned them?

If they can torture, I can torture. But I'm not tit for tat. I'm old testament ten tits for one tat. I want a vast number of our criminal administration to suffer.

maintain? That cannot be answered because they are secret.

To watch special satellite hookups of all the torture he's not allowed to have at home.

To watch special satellite hookups of all the torture he's not allowed to have at home. Maybe it's even interactive, and he can phone in personal requests.

Nope, that doesn't work for us. No reason that the equivelent should work for them.

On the other hand, this story stinks to high heaven. Methinks some people are starting to get very scared.