President Obama's Guantanamo decisions bring joy to Human Rights Leaders

A delegation of retired military officers from the organization Human Rights First expressed confidence in the new administration's commitment to human rights following a meeting with President Obama and Vice President Biden.

"There was a sense, I think, of satisfaction but also very much determination; determination that this was the right thing to do and that we would be consistent with this going forward" said retired Admiral John Hudson during a conference call with reporters.

"There was certainly among us, the sixteen retired generals that were there, a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction and joy, perhaps, that the country was getting back on track with regards to the issues that we feel so strongly about."

The retired Admiral went on to laud Obama's executive orders regarding Guantanamo and the treatment of prisoners, pointing to the advantages of due process in civilian courts. The delegation noted the use of Guantanamo torture as "recruiting posters" for Al-Qaeda, the counterproductive nature of torture, and the tone of discipline that will be set by changing these practices.


Human Rights First has been working to advance prisoner treatment qualities, and has been active in legislative and public debates about torture over the last several years. They see the three executive orders which Obama signed today as congruent with their goals, and a definitive step in the right direction.

Retired Admiral Lee Gunn reminded reporters of the tone of President Obama's meeting: "There will be substatial conversation... about what happens looking back... But at the moment, and it strikes me as being completely appropriate, the focus is on moving forward."

Interrogation techniques a reverse engineering experiment

The interrogation techniques used against detainees in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq, including those that lead to the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, originated from a Joint Personnel Recovery Agency (JPRA) program that trained U.S. military personnel in resistance to torture known as Survival Evasion Resistance and Escape (SERE) .

"Deputy General Counsel for Intelligence [for the Defense Department] Richard Shiffrin called and asked for a list of psychological and physical pressures used in SERE training..JPRA provided a list of techniques that included stress position, waterboarding, slapping, sleep disruption, and sensory deprivation," said Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich).


"Mr. Shiffrin testified that part of the reason the general counsels office sought the information was its interest in reverse engineering the techniques for use offensively in detainee interrogations."

Colonel Steven M. Kleinman, who spent a substantial portion of his career focusing on interrogation and human intelligence, said that this approach did not work properly. The SERE model was based on combatting a Cold War method that was designed to aid in the creation of propaganda and not the eliciting of information.

"Our approach to interrogation has failed to keep pace with our understanding of the operation environment and behaviorial sciences. Interrogation continues to be viewed as a relatively simple task that can be assigned to our most junior personnel," said Kleinman.

Interrogators, torture victims want old McCain back

"I join my voice with Joshua and the thousands around the country who are calling for Sen. McCain to go back and to clarify, and to speak as he spoke at one time simply to say that torture cannot be justified," said former torture victim and Purple Heart Recipient Father Roy Bourgeois. He, and others spoke in a teleconference to discuss what they see as Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) policy shift on the use of torture as interrogation techniques.

Joshua Casteel, a former U.S. military interrogator who served at the Abu Ghraib prison camp said that he was initially very proud to hear from Captain Ian Fishback, who publicized the views of McCain against torture techniques. He said these views contrasted those of Vice President Dick Cheney. Casteel went on to say that McCain seems to have changed his tune. He concluded by saying, "As a former interrogator myself, and with friends of interrogators and torturers, we are simply saying we want old Senator McCain back."

USAction Program Director Alan Charney also stated that Sen. McCain is the only US senator to have changed his position on the issue, referencing McCain's decision to negotiate with President Bush over habeas corpus legislation, and his decision to vote against legislation containing provisions that would have prevented the CIA from waterboarding prisoners. This past month, McCain also blasted the Supreme Court for its ruling in Boumediene v. Bush, holding that the executive branch must respect habeas corpus rights even when dealing with enemy combatants.

Water boarding proved "very valuable" in Guantanamo

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft spoke at the fifth part of a hearing entitled “From the Department of Justice to Guantanamo Bay: Administration Lawyers and Administration Interrogation Rules.” Ashcroft defended the Department of Justice’s action in Guantanamo Bay, saying that they worked within the framework of the law and never supported torture.

Ashcroft said that after 9/11, the Bush Administration’s overriding goal was to do everything within its power and within the limits of the law, to keep this country and the American people safe from terrorist attacks. He spoke about the Administration’s efforts to work within the law and follow Supreme Court rulings about torture and interrogations in Guantanamo, and that water boarding was never ruled as torture and has “proved very valuable.” Although the Supreme Court ultimately ruled against certain features of Administration policy in each of these cases, the “Justices themselves were closely divided and the courts of appeals had uniformly upheld the Administration’s positions.”

Ashcroft spoke in defense of the several memos in the Department of Justice about interrogation techniques and anti-torture, saying they were all legal and worked off Supreme Court decisions. Ashcroft said that the Administration’s continual quest for legal guidance and specific authorization for measures necessitated by the “war on terror” is evidence of a government striving to keep within the limits of law, not one seeking to ignore or evade those limits.

Also at the hearing was Benjamin Wittes, follow and research director in public law at the Brookings Institute. Wittes said that the Army Field Manual contains a great deal of specificity about the interrogation tactics used and it is a mark of how successful the policy changes have been that not even human rights groups today complain much about contemporary military interrogation policies. However, the current state of the law is inadequate due to the vagueness which gives the Administration enough interpretive latitude to authorize some pretty extreme tactics, such as water boarding, Wittes said.

America’s legal system reviewed in light of Guantanamo

The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing today about how the Bush Administration’s railed detainee policies have hurt the fight against terrorism. The witnesses discussed the lower credibility of the United States' action in Guantanamo Bay from a legal perspective.

Colonel Will Gunn, retired chief defense council for the Department of Defense office of military commissions, said that the government has taken several actions with respect to detainee policy in the post 9/11 era that have significantly “eroded this nation’s standing in terms of respect for human rights.” Gunn outlined several factors that show how the United States has done this through hiding prisoners, coercive interrogations, and an overall policy shift on Geneva Conventions.

“The system I encountered had several drawbacks which generated controversy, diminished the U.S.’s prestige at home and abroad, and fueled widespread perceptions that the system was unfair,” Gunn said. While some of the problems have been addressed by the Supreme Court, many still remain. Gunn recommended using the court martial system an federal courts to dispose of the cases of detainees that should be tried in a court of law.

David Rivkin, partner in the law firm Baker and Hostetler LLP, supported the Bush Administration’s actions in Guantanamo. He said that although members of Congress have “decried the detainee’s fate” at Guantanamo, few have offered suitable alternatives for the prisoners, so they must be keep there.

The individuals who crafted the policy in Guantanamo and the different legal aspects of the “war on terror” viewed the constitution as an obstacle and viewed the checks and balances of the U.S. government unnecessary, said Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies. Martin said in order to restore America’s standing as an example of just law, it must reinstall due process of law and the right of habeas corpus for the detainees at Guantanamo.