Recently, it occurred to me that, with all the debate or controversy over the Obama administration’s policies on torture, no one had asked the military, and in particular those running America’s “terror” prisons, if they had been using the Army Field Manual’s Appendix M. So, I called Guantanamo’s Public Affairs Officer, Lt. Commander Brook DeWalt, and asked him if Appendix M interrogations had taken place at Guantanamo.
This question may have more than intrinsic interest, as the administration has now announced that it is pursuing moving over a hundred Guantanamo “detainees” to a prison in Illinois. (The actions of Umar Abdulmutallab on an American Airliners jet on Christmas Day may have thrown a monkey-wrench into the “closing” of Guantanamo, but, most likely, Obama’s plans will move forward.)
Lt. Commander DeWalt took a few days to get confirmation, but when he spoke to me on December 11, he confirmed that while “not routine,” Appendix M interrogations are conducted at Guantanamo “as authorized,” “in accordance with DOD directives and U.S. law.” He would not go into operational specifics. Officer-In-Charge of the 4th Public Affairs Detachment (Guantanamo Forward), Lt. Col. James Crabtree, whom was also contacted, declined to be more forthcoming about dates when asked for more specific dates of operational usage.
Appendix M is the portion of the 2006 revised Army Field Manual that covers “unlawful enemy combatants” who don’t meet the U.S. government’s criteria for Geneva treatment as prisoners of war. Obama doesn’t want to call them illegal combatants anymore, so the government doesn’t call them anything, except people with lesser rights.
Famously, President Obama has proclaimed, as did his predecessor, that he was against torture, and was banning it in his administration. As a result, the Obama administration closed down the CIA secret black site prisons, though not, as it turns out, all secret black site prisons.
Obama also rescinded the torture memos of Bybee/Yoo/Bradbury/Addington/Levin, and replaced them with an interrogation policy oriented around the Bush-era Army Field Manual (AFM), whose latest incarnation was the brainchild of Donald Rumsfeld’s assistant, Stephen Cambone. At first, the new AFM was supposed to have a secret annex, so the “worst of the worst” could be grilled in U.S. military prisons, and not have any bleeding hearts or Al Qaeda types getting wind of what was going on.
But, brilliantly, one has to admit, they hit on the idea of simply laying the document openly among the people, and when there was no protest, and the politicians dutifully saluted, the new torture policy was ready to go. First, they had to line up some right-wingers to protest the new AFM was “too soft,” especially for use by the CIA. Then, they had to conduct a PR campaign that sold the AFM to the public, as humane, Geneva-compliant, and the negation of former Bush torture policies. Hence hoary old Senator Feinstein was rolled out to give the stamp of approval from “pragmatic liberal” types. No one else around the Beltway would peep boo from the left.
Appendix M was certainly not the old “enhanced interrogation techniques,” but they weren’t exactly not them either. The new AFM was supposed to be better than the old one, like any new product, but in fact, old prohibitions against abusive interrogation techniques were removed, and in some cases, the techniques formally reintroduced. An example of the latter is sleep deprivation, which used to be explicitly proscribed, but is now part of Appendix M procedure. “Fear Up” procedures are strengthened. Modes of sensory deprivation are introduced. The ban against drugs that cause serious derangement of the senses or temporary psychosis is replaced by a ban against drugs that cause “permanent damage.” Stress positions are, notably, not explicitly banned.
Next: “Will Military Torture Be Transferred to the United States?”




39 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Thanks for this report Jeff. Disheartening though it may be, we still need to call them out on all sides for their Orwellian names and destruction of the Constitution.
Our national shame.
Anyone else notice that as soon as Obama admin surged in Afghanistan, international/domestic violence took a sharp uptick?
It was like the world was holding it’s breath to see if O really was gonna do what he’d said. Unlike US they now know he’s the same old deal.
Thank you, Jeff. Don’t we already have torture being practiced in the ICE detention centers in the USA? Sleep deprivation,humiliation,extreme cold/heat, separating children from their parents.
I think it’s come home to roost. Just not used in rounding up citizens en mass.
“hoary old Senator Feinstein” ?? *G*
Heh,heh,heh….
A people that condones or ignores torture done in their names is not deserving of liberty but of liberation.
Thank you Jeff. Just for clarity’s sake, is this an accurate summary:
“A US military spokesman confirmed today that the military currently tortures prisoners at Guantanamo under policies explicitly approved by President Obama.”
Concise and true. Beautifully put.
Is it any wonder there are those who would harm our country when we behave like the enemies we despise? Aren’t these the methods and atrocities that engaged us wholeheartedly to combat the double threat of tyranny in the Pacific and in Europe during WW2. Have we forgotten who we are? What we aspire to be as a nation?
I like that!
As Teddy noted last night, “Without accountability, there is only complicity.”
It was a great post — go read the whole thing — and it dovetails nicely with this one.
yeah i thought that was a great pun. she meets the definition of “hoary”, and also of “whore-y” in the political standout for a handout sense of the word “whore” good job.
As if…! It’d be nice to see if it really is when presented to the docket at The Hague in Rummy’s war crime tribunal….! 8-(
I would say that DiFi is more of an escort because she is so well paid. :)
Agreed, the chickens are coming home to roost.
A number of people have pointed out that torture does take place in the U.S. already, especially in the Supermax prisons, also at ICE. While I agree, there is this difference, the Appendix M interrogations imply a greater use of torture (combinations of isolation, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, use of fear, no restrictions on stress positions, allowable use of drugs, etc.), and these are used for interrogation purposes, not as conditions of detention, or “incidental” to same.
This is not a small distinction, as the “techniques” are codified, rather than existing as unconstrained abuses. They also involve use of military forces, and are in violation of the Geneva conventions prohibition on “cruel treatment”, not to mention domestic law.
If Appendix M is implemented as is on U.S. soil, then the fight against tortuous conditions in U.S. prisons will be thrown tremendously backward.
My country ’tis of thee,
Sweet land of tortury,
Of thee I sing.
You’re right. That was one hell of an essay.
About thirty some-odd years ago, another Democratic administration came to power after eight years of a war-mad GOP administration. In that case, one of the White House residents was chased from office, forced to resign for some of his crimes. But the new Democratic president – one James Carter – failed to follow through and hold accountable those who had waged a war of aggression in Southeast Asia, killing over a million people.
Certainly, Cheney and Rumsfeld would have been chastened by that, if not found themselves in prison. But we know what happened, don’t we?
Now a new generation of “good Americans” are being challenged, and as before, the biggest obstacles are illusions in the occupant in the WH, and to some degree to those on Capitol Hill. I have yet to see the crew in power do much of anything to answer for the crimes of Bush/Cheney.
The notable exception was Carl Levin’s Armed Services Committee investigation into detainee abuse, and the uncovering of SERE torture operations. But what came from that? As I’ve reported, SERE psychologists still run some interrogations in the field, no one has been indicted, and at most a limited hangout of interrogation operations and a scaling back of the “enhanced interrogation” torture took place, or at least the perception is it took place.
What was left was, like the underside of an iceberg, the main portion of the interrogation-torture program.
Taking up a campaign against Appendix M would deliver a serious blow to the torturers’ program, and do more to upend the do-nothing obfuscation of the Obama administration when it comes to accountability. It might also unfreeze other investigations, such as the currently frozen OPR report. Was it not you, Peter, who opined that the OPR report is possibly being held up because its condemnation of illegal interrogation techniques would be… inconvenient… for the current administration, who has made the current Army Field Manual its official program?
If it was a pun on my part, it was unintentional. I was looking for a word that would capture her age and her antediluvian attitude towards “national security” issues.
Hasn’t she also, btw, called for Guantanamo to not be closed (for now… genuflecting per her inclination to the right-wing clatter about the underwear bomber)?
Let see, since 2002 the US military machine has murdered approximately 400,000 Muslims in this war on terror. The US continues to torture Muslims at Guantanamo in order to stop the war on terror.
When are the Christians in America going to stand up, be counted and say no more murder of Muslims. This Zionist Judeo Christian crusade is inspired by satan and the entire planet is suffering because of these evil doers. As a Christian I am ashamed at the hell that we put other nations through in order to conform to our misguided values.
Jeff,
I am thankful you received an answer to your question. As for the dates question, have you contacted the ACLU to see if they would have any leverage to seek an answer to that?
As a Baha’i, I’m ashamed…! *g*
They will come for us, sooner or later, said the Buddha, smiling in his perfect state of bliss.
Thanks for the post.
Attempted jabs of humor are requisite to sanity grasshopper.
Tweeted and Facebooked, and I used your photo of torture for the Facebook posting.
No, it’s not accurate. For one thing, the military spokesman confirmed the use of Appendix M interrogations to me on Dec. 11, 2009. No one would use the word “currently”, but only that the interrogations take place from time to time, “not routine”. As for the part about “policies explicitly approved by President Obama,” that’s totally correct.
I’m splitting hairs on the word “currently,” because I don’t want to be accused of making a statement the military didn’t make to me. And “currently” could be construed to mean “today,” a time frame I could not prove.
But it is really spitting hairs, I suppose. Appendix M is the official policy. It is and has been used (and more than once). The military won’t say more. Hence, I suppose one could say, use of Appendix M is the current policy, hence, torture is the current policy.
I’ve always felt that these “torture Lite” techniques, especially in combination over extended periods, are probably more harmful than more obviously abusive practices, although they can be passed off as more humane or no big deal. The techniques in Appendix M are sufficient to drive someone insane, get false confessions, create agony, lead to suicide, or destroy a personality. If a practice is authorized, even if there is the appearance of some rules governing it, it will be used and abused. Shifting the locale of the torture to Bagram air force base in Afghanistan or elsewhere, instead of Guantanamo, doesn’t restore human rights. Obama’s strange statement that “America does not torture” simply means that America tries to avoid the appearance of torture, holds no one accountable for it, and does not admit to practicing it. I’d like to think there may be less of it going on since it was exposed, but who knows? Maybe they are just doing a better job of hiding it or disguising it as non-torture, and as Jeff says, no one batted an eye over this appendix, so they succeeded in making it look legal and acceptable. That just gives cover to torturers, which could actually promote it’s practice.
Thanks.
And to klynn, @20 – I haven’t spoken to the ACLU on this. I don’t suppose they will have more leverage with these military spokemen, but I could see if they are interested in pursuing it further.
The next article in this brief series will concentrate on the larger response to the AFM/Appendix M issue by NGOs and the press.
I totally agree. Bmaz wrote an article to that effect almost a year ago now, and I will reference it in the next installment of the series.
But I’m glad to see that others, like yourself, see this problem clearly, and in all its implications, re the use of “torture-lite”.
Thanks for this, Jeff. If Appendix M interrogations move to Illinois, it will be interesting to see if ACLU or other organizations will be willing to make a court challenge, since some of the dodges used in putting it in place at Gitmo won’t be in place.
Sadly, the more things change the more they remain the same. Now we have some Obama Democrats defending Obama’s version of the Bush policies just like we had Bush Republicans defending Bush policies when he was president. The new 3rd way will be rounding up Republicans and Democrats who are against both versions of these anti-American policies.
Fascist pigs.
Jeff Kaye..thank you for your diligence. I admire your spunk.Please keep up the good reporting for those who have no voice.
Thank you..good to see those words from a Christian.
As a human, it hurts me to think that the govt. of the country I live in is the biggest terroist organization in the world. We may not have laws to punish the torturers…but there is always Karma.
This is so disgusting it’s almost beyond words. Torture. Murder. Shock and Awe. Thought an election of a different party, and a different kind of politician would change this stuff. Shame does not adequately describe it.
Didn’t Obama promise that all prisoners that are not transferred to Federal court would be held under Geneva convention rules? Has the administration admitted that appendix M violates the Geneva conventions or do they deny that?
Sleep deprivation was used by the Brits against the IRA – so different groups of citizens get different rules under Brit law – and it seems that not having a country to claim you as a soldier can remove protections offered under Geneva such as:
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated.
Prisoners of war are entitled in all circumstances respect to their persons and their honor.
No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever.
Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.
Why “torture” is different for one group compared to another is beyond my pay grade – and ability – to understand.
They will tell you that Appendix M is in compliance with Geneva. However, that is predicated on the belief that you can hold these prisoners outside of both the Geneva POW and Civilian protocols; in a “no man’s land” legally, so to speak. This was the position of the Bush administration. It was Gonzales and Yoo’s position, and it appears to be that of the Obama administration. Civil liberties attorneys will tell you that if the prisoners are not allocated POW status, then they fall under the Civilian portion of the Geneva Conventions (the fourth convention, I believe).
Appendix M for those who read it (and the link to the Manual is in the article above) is full of caveats and safeguards and need for authorization… just like the EITs were. Yeah, “in accordance with DoD directives and U.S. law”, that’s the ticket!!
Here’s the Obama administration recently on Geneva rights in the courts: they are not persons.
http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/supreme-court-refuses-hear-suit-seeking-accountability-guantanamo-torture
“December 14, 2009—Today, the United States Supreme Court refused to review a lower court’s dismissal of a case brought by four British former detainees against Donald Rumsfeld and senior military officers for ordering torture and religious abuse at Guantánamo. The British detainees spent more than two years in Guantanamo and were repatriated to the U.K. in 2004.
The Obama administration had asked the court not to hear the case. By refusing to hear the case, the Court let stand an earlier opinion by the D.C. Circuit Court which found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a statute that applies by its terms to all “persons” did not apply to detainees at Guantanamo, effectively ruling that the detainees are not persons at all for purposes of U.S. law. The lower court also dismissed the detainees’ claims under the Alien Tort Statute and the Geneva Conventions, finding defendants immune on the basis that “torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants.”
Thanks for remembering this case and bringing the link here.
So … the policy is Geneva-compliant because (and *only* because) it applies to detainees to whom (by way of *special* extra-judicial AND illegal definitions) Geneva conventions are deemed to not apply!
Unbelievable Orwellian fuckery. And shameful.