by Jennifer C. Hunt

The CIA and Detainee Abuse

Today’s New York Times reports that the book has been closed on 100 cases of detainee abuse by CIA interrogators who were operating under the Bush-Rumfield-Gonzalez administration’s doctrine that redefined torture as legally acceptable “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Evidence suggests that the CIA destroyed videotapes of interrogations in case the newly elected president, Mr. Obama, should decide to fulfill his promise to increase government transparency and look into violations of the Geneva convention and State and Federal law regarding the issue of interrogation among others.

2 cases remain under investigation. One case involved a CIA interrogator who apparently told his victim that failure to cooperate could result in his family members being bought to prison, perhaps subjecting the females to sexual abuse.

I am incredulous. The case mentioned above is disgusting but it is hardly the worst psychological and physical torture technique that was delivered by the CIA and perhaps received approval up the chain of command.

I am more upset by Obama’s unwillingness to open up the books on torture and interrogation to journalists and scholars than the decision of the Justice Department not to prosecute operatives working with the implicit or explicit authorization of their superiors, although I do wonder what happened to their conscience.

I want to see Rumfield, Gonzalez and Bush exposed and punished for their crimes against humanity before I do those at the lowest ranks who were possibly obeying the law as it was then defined.

There is an interesting contradiction in the part of the article that quotes Republican Senator Charles E. Grassley who is an opponent of the investigation of the CIA’s actions during the Bush administration.

“Perhaps now our intelligence professionals in the field can stop looking over their shoulders,” he said ” and the attorney general will quit armchair quarterbacking from Washington D.C. intelligence decisions in the field.”

This quote contradicts the CIA’s only defense for using enhanced interrogation techniques (i.e. torture) to try and gain confessions. To repeat, their only defense is that they were operating under the assumption that they were acting with the permission of the U.S. government and its Commander and Chief, George W. Bush. He and his lackeys were the armchair quarterbacks that authorized the use of torture in interrogations.

Does the Senator suggest that these agents should be free to use any techniques they feel like using despite the change in administration and its apparent return to pre-Bush definitions of torture?

If CIA operatives are acting on their own, free of federal, state and international law and should be acting on their own as operatives “in the field,” then they and the senator have a serious problem.

They should not act as if they are serving the security and other interests of a democratic nation. Instead, they should be shipped to a country that does not have a democratic form of government and where no rules surround the treatment of detainees.

It is worth noting that CIA interrogators are not making split second decisions in combat. Nor are they reacting situationally to the recent loss of buddies in war or other types of experience that distorts thinking and can unleash bits of the devil in almost any human being.

The CIA interrogators are making premeditated decisions during interrogations that may go on for many hours. In some cases, they need to gain information immediately that they believe will save American lives. In others, they have time to spare.

I wonder why no one has mentioned the CIA’s participation in other kinds of extreme torture. Are we still sending “enemy combatants” and/or terrorist suspects to other countries where extreme modes of torture are allowed? Do the CIA operatives and/or interrogators watch while others do the dirty work in these other nations?

I hope this is not still going on but, in view of the lack of transparency of our government, I fear it is.

SEAL Team Six: Memoirs of An Elite Navy SEAL Sniper

I have just begun to read the book, SEAL Team Six by Howard E. Wasdin and Stephen Templin.  While,  I have not yet read a sufficient amount of the book to write review, I will share some preliminary thoughts.

l. The jacket cover’s version of the story makes it sound like the book will be another Marcus Lutrell, Lone Survivor, one of the worst books I’ve read since the millennium.

2. While I can’t tell how the rest of the book will read, I am relieved to say that the first chapter does not appear to resemble Lone Survivor’s whiny and thoughtless assault on the Rules of Engagement (ROE). Instead it begins with an account of the world from the perspective of a SEAL sniper in the middle of an operation. It’s an interesting depiction of how a sniper gets “into the zone” so he andhis rifle are one.

3. It is  also interesting to read an account that reveals how one Navy SEAL thinks. He doesn’t come across as intellectually vapid as Marcus Lutrell. He does appear to hold a similarly simple and almost childlike view of the world that neatly divides black and white. It may be that this world view is necessary for him to effectively executive missions that involve killing other human beings  while blocking out all other thought.

4. Typical is his notion that “I felt that if we could kill Atto and Aidid, we could stop the fighting, get the food to the people quickly, and go home in one piece.”  A few pages earlier, the SEAL ridiculed the term “developing country” as “bullcrap,” claiming the term failed to describe the reality of starvation and war, “two of the worst events imaginable.” Instead, it just helped people feel good.

5. Sorry SEAL, but the term developing country is no less  illusory than the idea that two lethal shots from your rifle would have ended the fighting and aborted starvation in the country where you executed the relevant mission. To think that your actions could have that result allows you to dehumanize and make monsters out of Atto and Aidid so you can neutralize guilt, kill and still keep a foothold in your religion.

I’m not suggesting the your targets don’t deserve the title of monster. The problem is there are probably plenty more monsters there, waiting to take their place. Two shots from your sniper rifle might help get some food off some vehicles to distribute to a handful of  starving people.  Your actions will not feed sufficient numbers of the hungry to relieve their suffering and end the conflict, bloodshed, despair and poverty that I suspect is flooding their nation.

6. So far I like SEAL Team Six precisely because it reveals some of the mental means snipers use to do their jobs, including making monsters out of men and believing their actions can change conditions that are, in fact, determined by factors beyond their control. In addition, our author(s) appear to have an adamant belief in God, Christ and Country. While I respect their beliefs, I think it likely that they also allow our SEAL to execute missions that involve killing.

7. I’m not sure what I think of this use of religion. I can’t help but recall my southern grandmother’s uncanny ability to reconcile the bible with her justification of segregation.

8. For this reason, I am glad the some persons in the military are calling for atheist chaplains. I believe in religious freedom and the separation of church, state and the military. I am uneasy with the idea that our wars might be justified by some sort of  right wing Christian belief that turns our wars intomodern versions of the bloody crusades with missionary-soldiers trying to spread their faith along with the notion that every state would best function if it were organized according to the  principles of an American style democracy and a “free market” economy.

9. Don’t misunderstand me here. The authors of SEAL Team Six do not appear to be doing this. I am just uneasy with some of their implicit religious rationalizations.

10. Still, I would like to know if there are any SEALS out there who wear their religious beliefs as softly on their shoulders as they walk in their ghillie suits.

I will write a real review when I finish the book.

Bin Laden is dead!

Yesterday morning at 5 a.m., I got an email from a friend who is a retired Navy Seal.

“This is what I was talking about!!” summarizes pretty much all his cryptic message said.

“What? What happened?” I responded or something to that effect. I’d gone to sleep early the night before and hadn’t turned on the news.

At 8 a.m. I got on the subway and sneaked a peak at a passenger reading the Daily News. That’s when I learned that Bin Laden was dead.  Ten minutes later I picked up the New York Times and read the story. CIA and Special Forces operatives (Navy SEALS) killed Bin Laden some place in Pakistan.

Congratulations to the Navy SEALS and CIA and the rest of men and women in the military who have been hunting Bin Laden and fighting our wars since 9/11 and before.

As the Commander and Chief, President Obama finally has a feather in the cap I’ve been bitching about for years.

He gets to take the credit for what the SF guys did and rightfully so – in the same way that President George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld should have taken responsibility for Abu Ghraib.

After all, they (Bush and Rumsfeld and Gonzalez)  created the conditions for the war crimes at Abu Ghraib to occur- Authorization (implicitly or explicitly authorizing violations of the law and uniformed code of military justice), Routinization (normalizing troublesome acts as if they were as American as apple pie) and Dehumanization (anyone who is Middle Eastern and in the wrong place at the wrong time is a bad guy. The world is divided between good and bad guys with no one in between).

I’m willing to celebrate the victory of the Navy SEALS and other folks in the military. I’m less inclined to celebrate that of Obama. I remain a disgruntled one time supporter who is befuddled by his leadership.  Do we really need General David Petraeus to head the CIA? I’m all for enhancing communication between agencies. I am not in support of mixing up who does what.

We’ve got former CIA manager David Cohen screwing up the Intelligence Division of the NYPD, apparently turning that unit into a secret police force that acts above the law…. (see my post in http://onviolence.com/)

And now who is the head of the FBI?

Why did we get involved in the Libya situation?

Isn’t there a solution to Guantanamo?

Why hasn’t the shenanigans that graced the Bush administration been exposed?

Didn’t he promise more transparency in government?

What is going to happen in Afghanistan now?

What’s going on with the damned Road and USAID?

Why don’t we get more real news on the war?

A small tribute to the photojournalists killed in Libya

Brooklyn photojournalists Chris Hondros and Tim Hetherington, the co-director of the  documentary “Restrepo,” were killed in Misrata when Khadafy‘s forces shelled the city.

Four New York Times reporters are also missing in action.

Several months prior to these photographers’ death, I had lunch with a young photojournalist who had been among those beaten up during the demonstration in Egypt.  I listened, fearful for his safety, as he told me about some of his plans for his next expedition. In another conversation with a second photographer who had taken pictures of me for Financial Times UK, we talked of his adventures in dangerous areas in the Middle East and the risks he was willing to take to get his stories. I offered to share any contacts I had if he decides to go to Afghanistan or Iraq.  I suddenly saw his eyes in the handsome face of one of the missing journalists.  I wonder where my friend is now and if he is safe.

Since I read Dispatches in the 1960′s I’ve admired war journalists and photographers. At times I’ve even gone so far as to fancy myself as one of them although I don’t think I have the courage to do their jobs – racing sometimes alone or with their translators, carrying cameras and recorders and paper and pens but no weapons, through firefights and bombings, death and destruction…

Just yesterday, I was showing the movie The Killing Fields to members of one of my classes. I’m watching the rest of the film here at home tonight.

Soon, as  I recall, the journalist’s translator, Tram, will be depicted in the film, running through the rice fields, falling among the hundreds and thousands of bodies killed by the Kymer Rouge. That image has been implanted in my head since the film came out sometimes in the 1980′s.

I don’t know how many combat translators die while supporting their patrons’ efforts to cover the news and helping to get them out of  jams that require native cultural expertise. I know there are more than a few.

The translators are the unspoken heroes along with the journalists and photographers who risk their lives to bring us news and attempt to maintain the transparency inside and outside the U.S. that is required to maintain a democracy and be informed about world events.

Thank you Chris and Tim. I am sorry for your families and close friends. Your deaths are a loss to all of us in New York, in the U.S. and around the world.

NYPDCIA: Counterterrorism and the NYPD

See my guest post in the wonderful blog by Eric and Michael Cummings.

http://onviolence.com/

Sad Day for Democracy

Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four alleged co-conspirators accused of organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, will be tried in a military court, possibly at Guantanamo.

We have a criminal justice system that is not perfect but has worked satisfactorily to assure the  rights of the accused while bringing terrorists to justice.

To me, the decision that the 9/11 suspects can’t be tried in the criminal justice system underscores the lack of faith that many in the U.S. have in democracy.

It was foolish to propose that the trial be held in New York City. It would have cost taxpayers too much.  It would have created even more tension, fear and a painful reliving of events than did the Air force One plane that sped across the Manhattan skyline in a photo-op that New Yorkers weren’t warned about.

The trial could have been held somewhere else.

Meanwhile, the religious zealot who burned the Koran in Florida and is causing havoc in Afghanistan has the protection of the U.S. constitution. There is no law against burning bibles, flags, or Korans.

Apparently, his actions couldn’t be interpreted as a hate crime.

In my mind he is no different from the Taliban in his fundamentalist belief and the rage and fury that informs his black and white view of the world and his grandiose sense that he, and only he, has insight into the correct interpretation of the Muslim religion as well, I suspect, as Christianity.

What’s up in the Seattle P.D.?

Something odd is happening in the Seattle P.D. or maybe something has been happening for a long time and I just hadn’t heard anything about it.

The Justice Department is planning to conduct an investigation of the Seattle P.D. after a series of incidents in which police have been accused of brutality and discriminating against minorities.

Apparently, a an officer shot a woodcarver and member of the First Nations of Canada. The victim had limited hearing and was frequently drunk. I haven’t seen a report of the shooting. The officer was not charged although the Department found that the shooting was not justified.

Other incidents involving use of nonlethal force against minority members of the community have also angered citizens who have called for the federal investigation.

Yet, historically, as far as I know, the Seattle P.D. has had a reputation of having positive relationships with members of some minority communities, at least.

In the wake of 9/11 the Seattle and Portland Police Departments both refused to cooperate with the FBI in their efforts to interrogate Arab Americans with temporary visas regarding their knowledge of terrorism. The police department believed that this sort of interviewing constituted profiling and would harm their relationship with the community, increasing lack of trust and ultimately undermining their ability to gather intelligence regarding future terrorist plots.

The Police Department in Dearborn, Michigan took a different stance. Concerned with damaging their relationships with the Arab American community there, they also refused to participate in the interviews with the FBI. However, they agreed to help the FBI locate relevant parties and accompany them on the interviews, “monitoring” them to ensure that relevant parties understood that participation was voluntary.

A number of police departments across the U.S. worked alongside the FBI or conducted the relevant interviews, to the detriment, I believe, of their relationships with the Arab American community.

What the above has to do with the current allegations of police abuse of force against minorities in Seattle I’m not sure.

However, I’ll be curious what the investigation reveals.

On Culture: Driving in L.A. and N.Y.C

I am fascinated by cultural differences in urban behavior within the U.S. as well as internationally.  Watching people drive in New York City is a dead give away as to where they hang their hat even before seeing their license plates.

I once sat next to a friend from California who was, paralyzed, while trying to make a left turn in New York City.F inally, in desperation, I had to resort to some tough back-seat-driving talk to get him to move. He didn’t understand that New York drivers  learn to push their way through.

The other day, a friend told me a story about his observations of driving in L.A. and N.Y.  He was on the turnpike in L.A. when an ambulance switched on its siren a half mile back. In an orderly fashion, cars turned into the far lanes and stopped, leaving the center lane clear for the ambulance and any other emergency vehicle that might come along. The people didn’t start driving again until after all emergency vehicles had passed.

A week later, my friend was driving on the FDR when he heard the sound of a siren. As the ambulance moved south, the cars moved right or left to make way but they didn’t stop or slow down. As soon as the ambulance passed, drivers moved their vehicles back into the middle lane and stepped on the gas, following in the path of the ambulance to get where they were going in record time.

In New York City, jaywalking is considered natural and normal behavior. Jaywalkers jaywalk in front of police cars,  knowing that cops understand informal rules and don’t view the practice as an affront to their authority.

I don’t know if people jaywalk in L.A.

I do know that jaywalking is considered immoral and illegal in urban Germany. Jaywalking is seen as bad partly because it sets a poor example for the children.

Seattle appears to have relatively strict rules in regards to jaywalking. According to a recent article in the New York Times, a Seattle police officer stopped a young black woman for jaywalking then beat her when she  presented resistance. The incident was apparently videotaped.

In this case, jaywalking was not the impetus of the apparent beating but rather the challenge to police authority.

Winning Hearts and Minds in L.A: Muslims and the Police

In today’s New York Times, Laurie Goodstein provides an encouraging report regarding the relationships between the police in L.A.s County Sheriff’s Department and members of the Muslim community.

“We’re not gong to win the war against terrorism without Muslim’s, ” Sheriff Leroy Baca is quoted in an interview.

“Law enforcement officers visit mosques…., have tea with imams and … hand out business cards.” An example is cited of a father who reported to police his concern that his son was demonstrating signs of religious fundamentalism and an interest in Jihad. The police interviewed the teenager and discovered he was simply asserting his Muslim identity rather than an interest in participating in terrorism.

Years ago, in the wake of 9/11, the federal government pushed local law enforcement agencies to work with them interrogating Muslim members of the community about their and their neighbors’ activities, in essence labeling all Muslims suspects. The acting Chief of the Portland and the Seattle P.D.s refused to cooperate. They believed that such indiscriminate questioning would alienate members of the Muslim community with the result trust would be undermined and future intelligence lost.

The result would be fear and silence and the reduction in the police department’s ability to learn about terrorists plots before they came to fruition.

Local police have also been pressured to cooperate with INS and question Muslims and others about their immigration status. A number of police departments have avoided asking the relevant questions because they are likely to reduce trust and limit the likelihood that Muslim (and other immigrant) members of the community will report terrorist threats  or serious crimes.

Had a Muslim man who spoke little English not have trusted the police sufficiently to come forward to report his knowledge of a plot to blow up the subway in Brooklyn in 1997, many lives would have  been lost in the first suicide bombing in New York City.

Kudos to  the L.A. Sheriff’s Department

Bluebloods has Regressed!

Photograph is 6 Truck NYPD-ESU in the old days.

Bluebloods has regressed. To put it simply, the technical advise for this program sucks. The program is an embarrassment to anyone who wants to know anything about the NYPD and to the police officers who work in that world. I haven’t seen the latest episode but I did see the one before that.

In that episode, there is an attempt to assassinate the Police Commissioner. Detective Bluebloods (Danny) runs into a meeting of top brass. Guess who we see there – yet another police officer who is wearing a uniform with four stars on his shoulders. This means that the black guy who was once the four star chief of the department has disappeared with no reason provided. Now we have a white guy who has some grudge against the police commissioner from way back when. The PC, Tom Sellick, is such a nice, reasonable guy that he appoints a person with a grudge as the top rank uniformed member of the Department for the simple reason that he is competent.

When Danny approaches this chief of the department, he addresses him as “commissioner.” The proper term of address would be “chief” not commissioner. Commissioner is a civilian not a uniformed title. The real police commissioner is not dead but in a hospital. Therefore neither the first deputy commissioner nor the chief of the department has taken his place. Here is where my own technical expertise fails. I am pretty sure the first deputy commissioner is in line to be the PC if the PC suddenly dies. But I’m not certain of this.

Come on Bluebloods producers, how much does he take  to get just a few things straight. It’s really not all that complicated.

To make everything worse, guess who shows up at John Jay College for the dedication memorial for the Bluebloods brother who died in the line of duty.

You got it. At least three and possibly four, four star chiefs including Bluebloods Grandpa who is back in uniform as chief of the department, Bluebloods Tom Sellick who is at the podium in uniform as chief of the department, and, as I recall, the new white guy who appears to be the real chief of the department. Maybe there wasn’t a fourth. I stopped counting stars at some point.

Another piece of total technical idiocy: In the wake of an assassination attempt on a police commissioner, there wouldn’t be a two person security detail accompanying him everywhere. Intel detectives and others would go in to the area in which the dedication is to take place, many hours prior, and make sure there are no threats. They would also check out points of vulnerability and make a plan for a quick exit in the event of an attack.

Snipers from ESU and ESU officers carrying heavy weapons would be all over the place along with a large security detail as well as detectives from Intel, trained in dignitary protection.

The last thing that would happen would be to allow a guy, dressed like a priest with no proper I.D., down the escalator into the atrium. Even without all this happening, there are guards at the top of the escalator who check I.D s at John Jay College.

Guess who saves the day? Detective Danny Bluebloods and his uniformed brother appear to be the only officers who are capable of seeing the threat of the priest/assassin on the escalator and making the coordinated move to abort his second attempt to kill the Police Commissioner.

This little escapade makes the rest of the NYPD look bad. If only two officers in the whole police department are able to protect the Police Commissioner, what is going to happen if we have a serious terrorist attack?????