Psychologists who helped interrogate terror suspects for the CIA to testify Tuesday before Senate

[maddezmom]

Probe: Officials warned about harsh interrogation
By ANNE FLAHERTY – 35 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Military psychologists were enlisted to help develop more aggressive interrogation methods, including snarling dogs, forced nudity and long periods of standing, against terrorism suspects, according to a Senate investigation.

Before they were approved by then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, such harsh techniques had drawn warnings from military lawyers that they could be illegal, an investigation by the Senate Armed Services Committee has found. Officials familiar with the findings discussed them on condition of anonymity because the information has not been formally released.

The psychologists who helped interrogate terror suspects for the CIA were set to testify Tuesday before the Senate committee, which was expected to release details of the investigation.

The hearing is the committee's first look at the origins of the harsher methods used in Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba and Abu Ghraib in Iraq and how policy decisions on interrogations were vetted across the Defense Department. Its review fits into a broader picture of the government's handling of detainees, which includes FBI and CIA interrogations in secret prisons.

more:http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlcklXVQaqEKan6SFvWXydTqGtkAD91BQ3I00

[saltpoint]

1. How were torture and debasements handled in eras past when no

psychologists were available?

[Ian David]

3. Before there were psychologists, there were priests. n/t

[saltpoint]

9. You realize we're hurting the feelings of hate groups here by passing them

over in favor of Psychologists and Priests. Call me an elitist!

- - -

Hi, Ian. Nice to see you.

[Solly Mack]

2. woulda coulda shoulda...guilty!

[IndyOp]

4. Testimony starts at 9:30 a.m. EST -- it will be on C-SPAN3

...and I have to prep for class. Damn. I hope C-SPAN will have it available to view later today. Do they do that automatically now? Should I be able to find it just by searching the C-SPAN site later today?

I know Amy Goodman will report on this... You can find her series of interviews in the "Features" section of DemocracyNow! website ->
http://www.democracynow.org/features/apa

[izzybeans]

5. Expect jargon filled obfuscation.

Lots of it.

[Mojorabbit]

6. Pull their

medical licenses.

[wryter2000]

8. Just to clarify

Psychologists don't have medical licenses. Also, these may not be therapists but more academic psychologists. I have a Ph.D. in psychology and have in the past worked writing psychological reports. I've never been a therapist, but I'd be referred to as a psychologist if I were doing this kind of work. (Which I'd never do. :scared:)

If they're not therapists, I'm not sure what code of ethics they'd be operating under. IMHO, they're probably not covered by anything but their own humanity, which I'm sure is sadly lacking here.

[Alcibiades]

10. They are covered by something

According to the CV of one of the members of his committee at Bowling Green State University, Orissig did his dissertation in 1998, and it was titled: "Communication Apprehension and Morita Therapy: Evaluation of a Brief Morita Therapy Workshop Against a Stress Management Education Control." He's listed elsewhere as having his dissertation published in 1999.

Hard to say what sort of psychologist he is. Is BGSU known for research psychology? Before he left the Air Force, he was Chief of Psychology Services at an Air Force Survival training school. This would mean he was an administrator, probably doing program development and pencil pushing. Still, given his background in stress, he may have been doing some research for the Air Force on how to resist interrogation.

As for the matter of licensure, I would strongly suspect that Orissig is licensed somewhere. It would be odd for a chief of psych services to not be licensed in some state, though I don't think he'd be required to be licensed in the particular state in which he was residing. He'd be bound by the ethics codes of that state. Additionally, there is the matter of the APA code of ethics,to which all APA members are supposed to adhere, without regard to what area of psychology they practice/study/teach. It's at:

http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html

It's pretty clear that developing a torture program would violate the APA code.

Anyway, I'm not sure he's culpable in this. From what we have heard before, people at top levels looked through the information the military uses for torture resistance training to reverse engineer torture. I doubt this was initiated by the military, certainly not military psychologists. As it says at the conclusion of the article, "... the Air Force and Army specifically warned that the methods could be illegal. Their objections were ignored."

If any psychologists were involved in this, however, they certainly could have their licenses yanked. But first someone would have to complain to the appropriate agency in the state that licensed them.

[cosanostradamus]

7. FIRST, DO NO HARM

.
Second, waterboard them.
.