Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Straight, Inc. and Derivatives => Topic started by: PerfectStraightling on December 21, 2004, 02:01:00 PM
-
Newly Obtained FBI Records Call Defense Department?s Methods "Torture," Express Concerns Over "Cover-Up" That May Leave FBI "Holding the Bag" for Abuses
NEW YORK -- A document released for the first time today by the American Civil Liberties Union suggests that President Bush issued an Executive Order authorizing the use of inhumane interrogation methods against detainees in Iraq. Also released by the ACLU today are a slew of other records including a December 2003 FBI e-mail that characterizes methods used by the Defense Department as "torture" and a June 2004 "Urgent Report" to the Director of the FBI that raises concerns that abuse of detainees is being covered up.
"These documents raise grave questions about where the blame for widespread detainee abuse ultimately rests," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "Top government officials can no longer hide from public scrutiny by pointing the finger at a few low-ranking soldiers."
The documents were obtained after the ACLU and other public interest organizations filed a lawsuit against the government for failing to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request.
The two-page e-mail that references an Executive Order states that the President directly authorized interrogation techniques including sleep deprivation, stress positions, the use of military dogs, and "sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc." The ACLU is urging the White House to confirm or deny the existence of such an order and immediately to release the order if it exists. The FBI e-mail, which was sent in May 2004 from "On Scene Commander--Baghdad" to a handful of senior FBI officials, notes that the FBI has prohibited its agents from employing the techniques that the President is said to have authorized.
Another e-mail, dated December 2003, describes an incident in which Defense Department interrogators at Guantánamo Bay impersonated FBI agents while using "torture techniques" against a detainee. The e-mail concludes "If this detainee is ever released or his story made public in any way, DOD interrogators will not be held accountable because these torture techniques were done [sic] the ?FBI? interrogators. The FBI will [sic] left holding the bag before the public."
The document also says that no "intelligence of a threat neutralization nature" was garnered by the "FBI" interrogation, and that the FBI?s Criminal Investigation Task Force (CITF) believes that the Defense Department?s actions have destroyed any chance of prosecuting the detainee. The e-mail?s author writes that he or she is documenting the incident "in order to protect the FBI."
"The methods that the Defense Department has adopted are illegal, immoral, and counterproductive," said ACLU staff attorney Jameel Jaffer. "It is astounding that these methods appear to have been adopted as a matter of policy by the highest levels of government."
The June 2004 "Urgent Report" addressed to the FBI Director is heavily redacted. The legible portions of the document appear to describe an account given to the FBI?s Sacramento Field Office by an FBI agent who had "observed numerous physical abuse incidents of Iraqi civilian detainees," including "strangulation, beatings, [and] placement of lit cigarettes into the detainees ear openings." The document states that "[redacted] was providing this account to the FBI based on his knowledge that [redacted] were engaged in a cover-up of these abuses."
The release of these documents follows a federal court order that directed government agencies to comply with a year-old request under the Freedom of Information Act filed by the ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans for Peace. The New York Civil Liberties Union is co-counsel in the case.
Other documents released by the ACLU today include:
· An FBI email regarding DOD personnel impersonating FBI officials during interrogations. The e-mail refers to a "ruse" and notes that "all of those [techniques] used in these scenarios" were approved by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. (Jan. 21, 2004)
· Another FBI agent?s account of interrogations at Guantánamo in which detainees were shackled hand and foot in a fetal position on the floor. The agent states that the detainees were kept in that position for 18 to 24 hours at a time and most had "urinated or defacated [sic]" on themselves. On one occasion, the agent reports having seen a detainee left in an unventilated, non-air conditioned room at a temperature "probably well over a hundred degrees." The agent notes: "The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his own hair out throughout the night." (Aug. 2, 2004)
· An e-mail stating that an Army lawyer "worked hard to cwrite [sic] a legal justification for the type of interrogations they (the Army) want to conduct" at Guantánamo Bay. (Dec. 9, 2002)
· An e-mail noting the initiation of an FBI investigation into the alleged rape of a juvenile male detainee at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. (July 28, 2004)
· An FBI agent?s account of an interrogation at Guantánamo - an interrogation apparently conducted by Defense Department personnel - in which a detainee was wrapped in an Israeli flag and bombarded with loud music and strobe lights. (July 30, 2004)
The ACLU and its allies are scheduled to go to court again this afternoon, where they will seek an order compelling the CIA to turn over records related to an internal investigation into detainee abuse. Although the ACLU has received more than 9,000 documents from other agencies, the CIA refuses to confirm or deny even the existence of many of the records that the ACLU and other plaintiffs have requested. The CIA is reported to have been involved in abusing detainees in Iraq and at secret CIA detention facilities around the globe.
The lawsuit is being handled by Lawrence Lustberg and Megan Lewis of the New Jersey-based law firm Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, P.C. Other attorneys in the case are Jaffer, Amrit Singh and Judy Rabinovitz of the ACLU; Art Eisenberg and Beth Haroules of the NYCLU; and Barbara Olshansky and Jeff Fogel of CCR.
The documents referenced above can be found at: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/fbi.html (http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/fbi.html).
-
The link doesn't work...
-
Try http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/ (http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/) Don't know why that doesn't work. Click on FBI Documents.
-
It's not about Bush, the FBI or the ACLU. It's about WHATEVER it takes to save American lives. I don't give a shit if Mother Theresa gives a table dance or golden shower at Gitmo. It's about saving lives; that means gathering intel by any means available. This isn't Straight or some other twisted up rehab, this is WAR. Jason
-
I'm not sure that the Iraqi civilians would have much intel on Osama bin Laden. The part of this that I am more torn on, is that maybe they were really in need of getting SH out of there, but even with that there is no need to torture the civilians. In fact, it seems, just slightly, at odds with that agenda. Answer this, why don't they come out and admit what they were up to if they are so in the right? Why all the secrets about their policies?
[ This Message was edited by: jane on 2004-12-21 14:11 ]
-
On 2004-12-21 13:46:00, misbehaver wrote:
"It's not about Bush, the FBI or the ACLU. It's about WHATEVER it takes to save American lives. I don't give a shit if Mother Theresa gives a table dance or golden shower at Gitmo. It's about saving lives; that means gathering intel by any means available. This isn't Straight or some other twisted up rehab, this is WAR. Jason"
Is it war? Is it really?
I think many would beg to differ on that assumption. Whose lives are really being saved?
Isnt/Wasnt the War on Drugs, a "war" too? Werent they just trying to save lives?Revelation indeed had no weight with me.
--Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father, author, and inventor
-
Isnt/Wasnt the War on Drugs, a "war" too? Werent they just trying to save lives?
It most certainly is a war that will be won!
And we don't try at Straight- we DO!
-
contrary to popular belief around here, everything does not relate to Straight, give it a rest already
-
On 2004-12-21 14:32:00, thepatriot wrote:
"contrary to popular belief around here, everything does not relate to Straight, give it a rest already"
I dont think it does either, however, the governments allowance of our treatment in Straight can sometimes serve as a very valid reference point when forming personal opinions on whatever else the governement might be allowing.
In other words, if they can do it here at home.....egads, what would they be willing to do abroad? Doesnt mean Straight and Iraq have one whit to do with each other.
It's a judgement of character. By the year 2000, we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God.
--Gloria Steinam, women's rights activist
[ This Message was edited by: Carmel on 2004-12-21 15:18 ]
-
Jane- "I'm not sure that Iraqi civilians would have much intel on Usama bin Laden"
The Iraqi that takes a tune up might give up info on hostile positions. This intel can save lives of Americans (military and private); possibly preventing civilian casualties and property damage.
Jane- "Why all the secrets about their policies?"
It's really pretty clear cut. You seem to understand what's going on "behind the curtain". You really need Michael Moore to bottle feed ya? It sucks, but you wanna tell a new recruit that he/she is not fighting for their country???
Carmel- "Is it a war? Is it really?"
Yes, it's real. I gotta check on a bud in Mosul. Out. Jason
"The unforgivable crime is soft hitting. Do not hit at all if it can be avoided; but never hit softly"
--Theodore Roosevelt
-
Ah. Now I know where Patriotette sleeps at night, rite Carmel?
-
On 2004-12-21 15:23:00, misbehaver wrote:
"
The Iraqi that takes a tune up might give up info on hostile positions. This intel can save lives of Americans (military and private); possibly preventing civilian casualties and property damage.
It's really pretty clear cut. You seem to understand what's going on "behind the curtain". You really need Michael Moore to bottle feed ya? It sucks, but you wanna tell a new recruit that he/she is not fighting for their country???
"
Hostile positions? Of people who are mad that we... invaded Iraq and tortured their citizens? Who now see us as being willing to occupy a country that was no threat to us?
I didn't get this from Michael Moore, its from the American Civil Liberties Union. If someone wants to go fight in Iraq, I think that is brave, but I also think they are being mislead.
-
Right on, Jane. Good post. :smile:
-
Jane, I was not trying to provoke you and I respect your right to express your opinion. Jason
-
Thanks Lezli.
Jason, I wasn't trying to provoke you either.[ This Message was edited by: jane on 2004-12-23 13:57 ]
-
On 2004-12-21 13:46:00, misbehaver wrote:
"It's not about Bush, the FBI or the ACLU. It's about WHATEVER it takes to save American lives. I don't give a shit if Mother Theresa gives a table dance or golden shower at Gitmo. It's about saving lives; that means gathering intel by any means available. This isn't Straight or some other twisted up rehab, this is WAR. Jason"
Right. That's just how the drug warriors have always defended their misdeeds; whether it's locking us up in warehouses for a little brainwashing, shooting unarmed suspects, cultivating snitches or planting evidence.
Has it worked? Are we all straight now? Are there less drugs? Less drug crime? Less harm from illicit drugs? No?
Then maybe what we're doing isn't working very well. Even when we do it to excess, even to extreme excess, it still doesn't work, does it?
All they'll accomplish by torturing suspects (and these are merely suspects, not people convicted of any crime by any jury or anything) is to 1) generate a lot of false confessessions and leads and 2) further convince the Arab world that Westerners are a bunch of immoral, sadistic pigs.
All good intentions aside, these fuckers are doing far more harm to the interests of a safe and secure America than any good they could possibly accomplish by these methods. You have rights atecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.
John Adams
-
Long have the powerful desired a war without end. The drug war was good, but the war on Terra is even more excellent! Because you can sell more weapons to more nations. And the warriors are also the instigators! Brilliant. It may be necessary to blow something up once in awhile to keep up the fear level, but we can still sell more weapons than anyone could ever need!!
-
The cia blew up WTC
-
On 2004-12-25 19:05:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Long have the powerful desired a war without end. The drug war was good, but the war on Terra is even more excellent! Because you can sell more weapons to more nations. And the warriors are also the instigators! Brilliant. It may be necessary to blow something up once in awhile to keep up the fear level, but we can still sell more weapons than anyone could ever need!! "
Yeah, and a lot of people were starting to get hip to the ruse of the War On Some Drugs. Even cops and churchgoing grandmaswere beginning to question it.
-
No shit! I've long thought that most of the people involved in drug policy reform are too niave. When 9/11 hit, their first impulse and public position was to bury the hatchet in the name of brotherhood. That was just before the "pot smoking = terrorism" Super Bowl Blitz.
It really and truely never was about drugs, was it?All contemporary religions and churches, all and every kind of religious organization, Marxism has always viewed as organs of bourgeois reaction, serving as a defense of exploitation and the doping of the working-classes.
--Nikolai Lenin, Russian revolutionary
-
I don?t think it does either, however, the governments allowance of our treatment in Straight can sometimes serve as a very valid reference point when forming personal opinions on whatever else the government might be allowing.
The government didn't have a lot to do with our treatment considering it was privately furnished and usually paid for. Now the governments not holding that privately run companies board accountable...that is another story.....as for WAR...at all cost you do what you can to gain intel....just my 2 cents
Daryl
-
On 2005-01-06 17:31:00, irvingbound wrote:
"I don?t think it does either, however, the governments allowance of our treatment in Straight can sometimes serve as a very valid reference point when forming personal opinions on whatever else the government might be allowing.
The government didn't have a lot to do with our treatment considering it was privately furnished and usually paid for. Now the governments not holding that privately run companies board accountable...that is another story.....as for WAR...at all cost you do what you can to gain intel....just my 2 cents
Daryl
"
Thats exactly what I meant, what they ALLOW. Not what they perpetrate.
-
Arg! That was me.
When the government's boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence.
-- Gary Lloyd
-
The government didn't have a lot to do with our treatment considering it was privately furnished and usually paid for.
Daryl
"
[/quote]
Really???? You haven't done much research into this have you.
-
http://www.the8thstep.com/ (http://www.the8thstep.com/)
Feb. 1, 1972 Excerpts from the Grant Request by the Seed to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Approved June 20. 1972. (Question marks indicate text that was illegible)
Purpose of the Grant - Drug Abuse Services
Name of the Project - THE SEED
Total Project Period - from 2/1/72 through 1/31/80
Grant Period - from 2/1/72 through 1/31/80
Grantee Institution - The Seed, Inc.
1311 S. Andrews Avenue
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33316
-
Not to mention Nancy Reagan, Robert DuPont, ALL of the Bushes, Mel Sembler....the list goes on and on and on. The government was DIRECTLY involved with our "treatment".
-
Even if Straight had goverment funds, which during the Reagan years was being passed out to anyone who wanted to open a "rehab", the Goverment did not run Straight...and didn't focus the time and energy on having anyone do true monitoring of such programs...Other idiots ran Straight....and we were the byproduct of their methods of madness to gain more riches....I didn't do as much time as others, and more than some...but it was always my opinion that Straight was just a privatly run money grubbing company that really could have cared less about anyone in there.....One fact is they used scare tactics to get their "clients" they used scare tactics to keep their "clients" and didn't even have an impatient license...I took Prozac over half the time I was in there...No doctor in their right mind would prescribe me that when I got out....Just another money making "add-on"....but who am I preaching to..the choir? We all know what they were all about....Did anyone ever know anyone to be turned away after their 14 day eval??
You are right...I only know what I've heard, and the little I've read...but I can't blame the Goverment...and I blame myself for being put in there...but I blame the company for it's actions against me and all of you...
D
-
The state of Florida failed to protect minors under it's jurisdiction.
The state of Florida issued Straight a license in spite of reports of child abuse, false imprisonment and recommendations NOT to from it's own investigators.
The US ambassador to Italy and the former US ambassador to Spain started Straight. They were on the board of directors for many years including during Miller Newton's tenure in the early 80's. Wouldn't the board be responsible for overseeing the treatment protocols and therapuetic philosophy?
Nancy Reagan endorsed Straight. So did former President George Bush.
The government didn't perpetuate abuse. They just ignored it and acted like they didn't know anything about it. Sound familiar?As a rule, children love their parents, believe what they teach, and take great pride in saying that the religion of mother is good enough for them.
--Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer
-
On 2005-01-07 20:14:00, whiterabbit wrote:
"
Nancy Reagan endorsed Straight. So did former President George Bush.
He and Barb wrote endorsements that were included in brochures. Jebby now endorses one of Straight's incarnations, SAFE (although he didn't see fit to put his daughter there even though he said it was the best, guess she didn't deserve 'the best'). Mel and Betty continue to shout their support of Straight/DFAF to ANYONE who will listen. W is just a moron who wants to screen the ENTIRE POPULATION for mental illness. I know, that has nothing to do with the program, but it really pisses me off. These people have way too much influence over our lives.
-
I was in STRAIGHT the day Clayton Williams announced he was running for govenor...I was "guarding" a door. We (my family) knew the Williams and he recognized me as he was walking out...he patted me on the shoulder and told me to "keep on" and what I didn't know is that it was on the Midland news (where I was from) and some of my buddies saw it....damn it!
But anyway, sure politicians were behind it....STRAIGHT was a card trick...they were showing all aces, but holding nada...If your a politician in the era of the rehab...and a program is showing a high percentage rate, while "taking the war to the problem"....thats the republican way isn't it....then it looks like a good thing to endorse...and the Bushes have a strong connection to Midland and how many Midlanders were in STRAIGHT? It doesn't help that a lot of kids were so brainwashed after they got out they HEAVILY endoressed the program....they had gone from Sid Vicious shirts and cocaine smiles to clean cut kids who loved their mommy and daddy's.....looked like success....
And there were success stories...I've know a few people who really had a hold on subriety when they got out...and were not fucked up in the head....just as I've known the polar opposite.
The fact that STRAIGHT held records from the inspectors, hid misbehaviors during those inspections, did all their damage behind closed doors, makes then accountable and those same politicains should have held them so, but that is the extent of their blame in my eyes....
D