“Despite Reports, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Was Not Waterboarded 183 Times
The number of times Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded was the focus of major media attention — and highly misleading. “
By Joseph Abrams
FOXNews.com
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
SNIPPET: “A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed’s face — not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect. According to a 2007 Red Cross report, he was subjected a total of “five sessions of ill-treatment.”
“The water was poured 183 times — there were 183 pours,” the official explained, adding that “each pour was a matter of seconds.”
The Times and dozens of other outlets wrote that the CIA also waterboarded senior Al Qaeda member Abu Zubaydah 83 times, but Zubayda himself, a close associate of Usama bin Laden, told the Red Cross he was waterboarded no more than 10 times.
The confusion stems from language in the Justice Department legal memos that President Obama released on April 16. They contain the numbers, but they fail to explain exactly what they represent.
The memos, spanning from 2002-2005, were a legal review by the Bush administration that approved the use of waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation techniques.” Obama banned the procedure on his second day in office, saying that waterboarding is torture.”
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090429_chilling_effect_u_s_counterterrorism
“A Chilling Effect on U.S. Counterterrorism”
April 29, 2009 | 1815 GMT
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart
SNIPPET: “Politics and moral arguments aside, the end effect of the memos’ release is that people who have put their lives on the line in U.S. counterterrorism efforts are now uncertain of whether they should be making that sacrifice. Many of these people are now questioning whether the administration that happens to be in power at any given time will recognize the fact that they were carrying out lawful orders under a previous administration. It is hard to retain officers and attract quality recruits in this kind of environment. It has become safer to work in programs other than counterterrorism.”
SNIPPET: “As we’ve previously noted, it was a lack of intelligence that helped fuel the fear that led the Bush administration to authorize enhanced interrogation techniques. Ironically, the current investigation into those techniques and other practices (such as renditions) may very well lead to significant gaps in terrorism-related intelligence from both internal and liaison sources — again, not primarily because of the prohibition of torture, but because of larger implications.
When these implications are combined with the long-standing institutional aversion of U.S. government agencies toward counterterrorism, and with the difficulty of finding and retaining good people willing to serve in counterterrorism roles, the U.S. counterterrorism community may soon be facing challenges even more daunting than those posed by its already difficult mission.”