AN INTERROGATOR SPEAKS- I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq

[kpete]

Source: Washington Post

AN INTERROGATOR SPEAKS
I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq

By Matthew Alexander
Sunday, November 30, 2008; Page B01

I should have felt triumphant when I returned from Iraq in August 2006. Instead, I was worried and exhausted. My team of interrogators had successfully hunted down one of the most notorious mass murderers of our generation, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq and the mastermind of the campaign of suicide bombings that had helped plunge Iraq into civil war. But instead of celebrating our success, my mind was consumed with the unfinished business of our mission: fixing the deeply flawed, ineffective and un-American way the U.S. military conducts interrogations in Iraq. I'm still alarmed about that today.

I'm not some ivory-tower type; I served for 14 years in the U.S. Air Force, began my career as a Special Operations pilot flying helicopters, saw combat in Bosnia and Kosovo, became an Air Force counterintelligence agent, then volunteered to go to Iraq to work as a senior interrogator. What I saw in Iraq still rattles me -- both because it betrays our traditions and because it just doesn't work.

Violence was at its peak during my five-month tour in Iraq. In February 2006, the month before I arrived, Zarqawi's forces (members of Iraq's Sunni minority) blew up the golden-domed Askariya mosque in Samarra, a shrine revered by Iraq's majority Shiites, and unleashed a wave of sectarian bloodshed. Reprisal killings became a daily occurrence, and suicide bombings were as common as car accidents. It felt as if the whole country was being blown to bits.


Amid the chaos, four other Air Force criminal investigators and I joined an elite team of interrogators attempting to locate Zarqawi. What I soon discovered about our methods astonished me. The Army was still conducting interrogations according to the Guantanamo Bay model: Interrogators were nominally using the methods outlined in the U.S. Army Field Manual, the interrogators' bible, but they were pushing in every way possible to bend the rules -- and often break them. I don't have to belabor the point; dozens of newspaper articles and books have been written about the misconduct that resulted. These interrogations were based on fear and control; they often resulted in torture and abuse.


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802242.html

[bobd0]

1. Uh, the lies of one George W. Bush and Richard Bruce Cheney plunged Iraq into civil war Matthew. nt

[Aviation Pro]

8. Richard Bruce?

Isn't he just plain old Dick?

[GrpCaptMandrake]

13. That's Richard Be-Dick "Bigtime" Cheney

to you, me and the rest of the world. Or "Five-Def Dick" as they called him back in the day.

[rocktivity]

2. The punishment fits the crime, then.

x(
rocknation

[FirstLight]

3. This was a really good article

It is heartening to hear that there were those who took the high road when so much over there has devolved into brutality ...

The book may be interesting, and should be a required reading in history classes perhaps, but I can't bring myself to read anymore about it. I just want this war OVER.

You know, Obama says he will close Gitmo - but how on earth are we going to make the reparations to those who were abused there? seems like we will be releasing a whole batch of newly made America-haters...

what a mess, thanks Bush... god I wish we could ship him and his cronies down there!

[Demeter]

4. I'm Sure That Shipping Heads on Ice to the White House Did Not Help

[w4rma]

5. When Obama gets in, Matthew Alexander needs a few promotions. (nt)

[gratuitous]

6. "I'm not some ivory-tower type"

What the hell is that supposed to mean? That only people who've tortured others can possibly grasp what a horrible mistake they've made? That is, if they still have a conscience to be horrified.

Fuck you, Mr. Alexander. Fuck you and everyone who knew or even suspected what you were doing all the way up your godforsaken chain of command. I'm in no mood for cheap theatrics now that you know what the "ivory-tower types" were telling you all along. For our trouble, we got called traitors and terrorist sympathizers. We were told to shut up and get in line. Listen to your betters. We didn't know anything, and were just spinning out a bunch of theories while the real men were hooking up the alligator clamps to the batteries.

You're bothered by what you saw? Go tell a goddam priest, if one has the stomach for your confession. If that doesn't work, try tossing yourself off the highest building you can find.

"Ivory-tower types." Well, I guess it's better than being a complete asshole type.

[Aviation Pro]

7. Thank you for your clarity.....

.....on the shameful situation that has besmirched our interrogator forces. Perhaps the solution to the problem is a robust screening process for interrogator candidates that inculcates moral indicators of the individual's personality in addition to the willingness to do the job.

[Raksha]

9. K & R

[Bucky]

10. Interesting word choice. If *he* feels tortured, how do the tortured feel?

Glad to see people turning against this horrible occupation, but the empathy levels could still use a little work.

[alfredo]

11. Get ready for the flood of torturers to find religion, and spill the beans

on what was done in our name. Sure, a good number will be coming out because it is the right thing to do, but some will be just trying to save their butts.

[pat_k]

12. Impeachment is the Only way to 'renounce' . . .

At the end of the article, Matthew Alexander tells us he is "optimistic" because "President-elect Barack Obama has promised to outlaw the practice."

Mr. Alexander makes it clear that he is aware that the "practice" -- the "torture and abuse" he witnessed -- constitutes a violation of EXISTING LAW. Presumably, he is also aware that subjecting a person to torture under the color of law is a violation so grave that we subject violators to the penalty of death under U.S. Code.

A promise to 'outlaw' something that is ALREADY outlawed is utterly senseless.

Like countless other impeachophobes both inside and outside the beltway, Matthew Alexander has bought into the delusional group think that ascribes some sort of meaning to such idiocy.

Failure to impeach is a declaration that the American people are incapable of enforcing the tenets of our Constitution or defending the sanctity of our laws. It demonstrates our willingness to tolerate blatant and willful violations of our most sacred principles and laws. After such an egregious failure, why would ANYONE trust this nation to enforce ANY promise we make in treaty or law?

Actions always speak louder than words. If the House doesn't wake up and impeach -- if Obama doesn't wake up and demand it -- no promises; no duplicate laws; no amount of hope-mongering can undo the damage done.

When we witness our fellow citizens committing crimes before our eyes, the only meaningful way to 'renounce' those crimes is to seek to enforce the law. When the violators are government officials, the duty falls to Congress to enforce the law by seeking to remove the violators. Only Congress -- Our Voice -- can object on behalf of the American People.

Nothing can take the place of impeachment. The crimes demand prosecution, but after-the-fact prosecution does absolutely NOTHING to demonstrate our ability to uphold our laws, and to keep our promises, IN REAL TIME.