It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US CIA Plane Sends Terror Suspects to Torturing Countries (from ATSNN)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:58 PM
link   
A number of news agencies have found substancial evidence that the CIA is exporting terror suspects to torture-utilizing countries by using a plane owned by a fake company. The plane has been spotted loading cloaked figures from Guantanamo Bay and then flying to these pro-torture countries - returning without the masked individuals.
Adding to the evidence, the "owners" of the plane are stated to have been born in the 50s, but were issued social security numbers in 1998.
 



www.commondreams.org
A US jet registered to a ghost company whisks terror suspects to countries that use torture, The Washington Post reported, based on its own investigation.

The Gulfstream V turbojet has been seen at US military bases around the world, often loading up hooded and shackled suspects and delivering them to countries known to use torture, a process the CIA calls "rendition," the Washington daily said.

The Post investigated the ownership of the jet, which has been spotted in Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan and which carries the tail number N379P, according to the newspaper.

The Post article confirmed much of a November 14 article published in the Sunday Times, of London, which obtained flight plans for the plane, which, the Times said, always departs from Washington, DC and has visited the US Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where about 550 terror suspects are held.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


It seems that the CIA has been caught committing the very acts that they have been solidly denying for years now. I've read a number of reports claiming that psychological torture is utlized by the US at Guantanamo bay, but it appears that the CIA prefers to simply send suspects abroad in order to make use of physical toruture techniques. Still, i find it curious that the US needs to do this in the first place. It seems that if the CIA really wanted to torture captives, it would have no problem doing it behind closed doors. The implications of them being caught would be horrible, but it doesn't really seem like much of a risk.
Does this mean that other nations should not hold back agianst torturing our troops? i'm not implying that torture is a positive thing - but it seems that the US is simply opening the flood gates. This article was also published in France - meaning that this study concerning the exporting of US detainees has definitly reached the international community.

[edit on 29-12-2004 by maegman]

[edit on 29-12-2004 by Banshee]




posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:33 PM
link   
The predictable spin on this is that the U.S. shops out prisoners to other countries for torture, not that those countries routinely use torture and nobody is doing a damn thing about it.

The fact that the article can even make the assumption that these prisoners are being tortured simply because of the names of the countries this plane has been spotted in displays their hypocrisy far better than anything I could write.

What they apparently fail to consider is that maybe, just maybe these prisoners aren't actually being tortured, but interrogated by agents of their native countries in hopes of gaining their cooperation.

Do I know one way or the other? No. But neither do the authors of this article, although that may not be apparent from the way the article is written.

I do know that torturing people doesn't produce useful results. Getting them to cooperate does.

But of course, that is irrelevant to an article based on assumptions and presented to promote a political agenda speciously labeled as "progressive".

Some Context On The Topic



[edit on 12/29/2004 by Majic]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I was cruising on the net and found this on the planet website
It is a dutch article about the subject. it was posted today. Planet did some research of its own. They found out that, The company that the planes are registered to, Premier Executive Transport Services Inc. Is a foreign company. The Gulfstream landed on Schiphol according to this Italian website.
The Times reported last month that the CIA also uses an all white Boeing 737 with the registration number N313P. But I couldn't find anything about that.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Illegal interrogation methods are probably very effective... think of all the drugs that are out there now, compared to the sodium pentathol days...
also think of all the things that you can do to someone that don't kill them...
also think of the fact that many whole familys of brothers were captured...
threatening a family member would also be very effective...
I read an artile that said american spies and soldiers are supposed to give whatever info they have if they are captured, becasue they are going to get it anyway... they compartmentalize it, so the info wouldn't do any good, unless they had one captured person from all compartments...

I don't know if this is right or wrong...
subjecting a person to the treatment they would get if captured by their own country may be fair, but is it "right'?... but as i said above... it is probably very effective regardless



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:38 PM
link   
The reply I posted to this article when it was in the ATSNN forum has mysteriously disappeared.

Perhaps it was shopped out to a foreign country for "rendtion"?

More likely, it got de-linked when the article was moved -- I think.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 06:57 PM
link   
I found this site about the company the plane is registered to

corp.sec.state.ma.us...

And this

www.globalsecurity.org...

Also I found out that the Times found out that there is now also a Boeing 737 operating for the same company, probably because of all the new terrorist that need to be tortured


It's a white boeing 737 with the registration number N313P



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 07:37 PM
link   
This is probably one of the most disturbing things I've read recently--disturbing because I'm convinced it is the truth.

The intelligence community lays down a pr line about how torture is unreliable, bad for morale, and generally counterproductive. The truth is, I'm afraid, that it works well enough for intel operatives to continually resort to it.

"outsourcing torture" has a number of obvious benefits for the CIA:

1. Deniability. No Americans were used in the making of this "horror movie."

2. The "fear factor" for detainees, when they realize they've touched down in Turkey or Uzbekistan, beyond the reach of any kind of civil rights inquiries.

3. The "fear factor" operating on detainees still in US custody: "We have your cousin in upstate Liberia, and he's singing like a little girl. This is your absolutely last chance to co-operate . . ."

4. Although the article lists a number of Arabic-speaking states, I'm confident that the really horrific tortures take place in non-Arabic areas. This way, the local guards have no idea what the victim is saying, and cannot conceivably assist him. Also, the possibility of realistic escape is removed. For instance, we have a lot of ground troops and facilities in Azerbaijan now.



Many supporters of this kind of behavior may assume that US's enemies are using torture anyway, and so this is tit for tat. Actually, the US workers with truly sensitive information are instructed on how to commit suicide without using any implements.

I have posted about the use of torture in the Iraq War before. I have a law enforcement background, and I remain convinced that the torture at Abu Ghraib, et al was co-ordinated by civilian intel. The whole problem was that civilian officers were in charge of the prison, and inexperienced guards were put under a double chain of command. What is more, the soldiers, at least at Abu Ghraib, were selected so they WOULDN'T have any idea of how to conduct an interrogation. This made them even more pliant patsies.

I read through what transcripts of Lt. England's testimony I could find. She tried to refer to the civilian intel that were giving orders. The prosecution would object, and the judges basically told her to give a different answer. She and others were supposed to be from an MP platoon, but all of the accused had never processed prisoners before --- they all worked in the motor pool (!)

The reason that I bring this up is to point out how inadequate Guantanamo really is for an interrogation. It is itself in a disputed, forward area in the US rivalry with Cuba. Plus, front line Marines have seen enough (and will have enough trained officers on hand) to know when the Law of Land Warfare is being violated. You could not perform "sensitive" operations where most of the troops rotate out regularly, and have communications with their families in the US.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 02:53 AM
link   
Agency officials and lawyers have discussed the possibility of changing U.S. laws and regulations to make it easier for the agency to hide its activities. That may be difficult, so for now, plane spotters can keep their eyes on the CIA. No Secrets: Eyes on the CIA

Figured a follow up on this might interest many people. Um, I'm getting a print prompt from my QuickLink 3 to print the page of this link (out of ink otherwise would). Is anyone else getting this?



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
The reply I posted to this article when it was in the ATSNN forum has mysteriously disappeared.

Perhaps it was shopped out to a foreign country for "rendtion"?

More likely, it got de-linked when the article was moved -- I think.



Don't reply to threads on ATSNN that haven't been upgraded yet. If they get moved...well, you know what happens. Bye-bye comments.

I have no doubt that the CIA outsources some of it's toture to other countries. It's a good way to skirt the law and avoid legal issues that would come to light in the US. It is funny that no one cares that these countries toture their citizens on a regular basis. That's fine, but the US is held to higher standards I suppose.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Hey, what's the big deal?

There's nothing wrong with US torture. Any troops or whoever torturing people are just blowing off some steam. Isn't that what Rush Limbaugh said?? What's wrong with letting off some steam by torturing people?

But, oh no, don't let them torture us. That's bad. If they torture us, let's nuke em!!
They're subhuman, after all.

While we're at it, let's let that Florida couple off with a congratulations for torturing their 5 foster kids. They did nothing wrong, they were just blowing off some steam...



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Look, if the CIA wanted to torture someone, they wouldn't spend the money to fly them out of gitmo. They'd just torture them there. There may be another explaination. I haven't seen anything but supposition to this point on this in everything I have read.

So, let me see if I understand where we are.

We have been pissed because these prisoners were at Gitmo, and now we're pissed because they're flying them out of Gitmo? ...supposedly.

Sounds like some of us are just going to be pissed no matter what.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
That's Not A Feature, That's A Bug!


Originally posted by dbates
Don't reply to threads on ATSNN that haven't been upgraded yet. If they get moved...well, you know what happens. Bye-bye comments.

I define that as a bug.

Anything that causes data loss is a bug -- in my well-informed opinion, anyway.

Perhaps replies should be disabled during this period instead, but I suppose that's a matter for the Board Questions & Business forum.

Meanwhile, my learned commentary on this topic is lost forever to the Eternal Bit Bucket, I guess.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:14 PM
link   
American service men and women were tortured amd killed by the Germans and Japanese in WWII, tortured and killed by the Koreans, Chinese and Russians during the Korean War. Tortured amd killed by the North Vietnamese, Russians and Chinese during the Vietnam War. Tortured and killed by Militants in Iraq during the Gulf War and now again being tortured and killed by Militants in Iraq. Torture is a dirty necessary part of war. If the torture and death of captured Muslim militants leads to info that saves American lives then it is justified regardless of your moral standings. Your morals will be of little benefit if the b***** set off a WMD in an American city. Are you going to stand before St. Peter at the Pearly gate and say I stuck to my morals, a million Americans died but, I stuck to my morals. Get real people we are facing an enemy who's sole purpose is the total annilation of America and the Christian Faith. If it would save my family and friends, I'd personally torture and behead every Militant we have in captivity, morals be damned. Gen Patton said it best, "You don't win wars by dying, you win wars by the killing the other poor bastard."



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by YorgaTorture is a dirty necessary part of war. If the torture and death of captured Muslim militants leads to info that saves American lives then it is justified regardless of your moral standings.


Torture doesn't lead to good intel and you should be ashamed for defending Saddam Hussein and others in their use of torture. If you say torture is acceptable, it means it's acceptable for anyone to use even if it's against Americans because they're just trying to win a war or prevent an attack on their country.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase

Originally posted by YorgaTorture is a dirty necessary part of war. If the torture and death of captured Muslim militants leads to info that saves American lives then it is justified regardless of your moral standings.


Torture doesn't lead to good intel and you should be ashamed for defending Saddam Hussein and others in their use of torture. If you say torture is acceptable, it means it's acceptable for anyone to use even if it's against Americans because they're just trying to win a war or prevent an attack on their country.


I would be ashamed if it was America that invented torture or if we were the only ones resorting to torture. I admit that I would tell you anything that you wanted to hear if you were torturing me. I also admit that if I thought you had info that may save lives, I'd torture you in a heart beat. I would gladly agree that I will not torture your guys if you do not torture mine. Less shake hands and have a gentlemanly war. No transgressions on either side. Wish that would work but it want. America didn't teach Saddam and the world torture. The Militants are going to do it regardless of what we do. So we are suppose to play nice
Sorry but that doesn't work for me. I've been in combat, I've looked down the barrel of my rifle at other human beings. When comes to protecting what I love, I will do what has to be done, PERIOD! No regrets, no hesitation. Ashamed? Sorry not me.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yorga
I've been in combat, I've looked down the barrel of my rifle at other human beings. When comes to protecting what I love, I will do what has to be done, PERIOD! No regrets, no hesitation. Ashamed? Sorry not me.


I guess that differentiates you from the most of the rest of us who know only what we concoct in our safe little dwellings. The difference of of knowing what its all about first hand and an imagined scenario of what we think it should be all about.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:46 AM
link   
i have posted this a week ago.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join