U.S. Used This Torture Box to Interrogate Gadhafi’s Enemies

When rebel forces overtook Tripoli in August 2011, prison doors were opened and office files exposed, revealing startling new information about Libya's relations with other countries. One such revelation, documented in this report, is the degree of involvement of the United States government under the Bush administration in the arrest of opponents of the former Libyan Leader, Muammar Gaddafi, living abroad, the subsequent torture and other ill-treatment of many of them in US custody, and their forced transfer to back to Libya.

The United States played the most extensive role in the abuses, but other countries, notably the United Kingdom, were also involved.

This is an important chapter in the larger story of the secret and abusive US detention program established under the government of George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks, and the rendition of individuals to countries with known records of torture.

Now juxtapose this information with the accusation that the CIA was aiding the Arab Spring rebels - it doesn't correlate. We have proof (above) the US was aiding Gaddafi, not his enemies. When Arab Spring broke out, we had a great deal of 'misinformation' coming from mainstream US media that denigrated them as terrorists and/or AQ, it was classic propaganda. In reality, it would appear the CIA was in league with Gaddafi in opposition to Arab Spring - and most likely the same situation was true for Mubarak in Egypt, another stopover for the CIA's rendition program.

Yeah that box is effective and will mess with your head. I was reading a book written by Nathaniel Fick ( a former recon marine from the Iraq war days). During SERE training they locked him in one of those boxes. He said it was pretty intense being stuck inside the box. When asked during debriefing how long he thought he was in the box he commented to the best of his recollection "I dunno about 3 hours" or something similar to that. "No. You were in there for 8 minutes" was the debriefers reply. So yeah the box will mess with your head.

It could be waaaaaay worse. I've seen interrogation photos that were snuck out of Saudi Arabia during the first gulf war of US SF (I know which branch) were interrogating prisoners. The guys were naked or minimally clothed and a little bloody. I asked what the interrogations usually consisted of. He said mostly just some smacking and hitting. Slamming a few heads against the wall. He said that the prisoners were little and scrawny and that their own physical size and strength was usually all the intimidation they needed. But he did go into detail about other alternatives that they can use if need be and it was pretty horrible stuff. With a lot of the stuff you are probably imagining right now. Soldering irons, electrified coat hangers, salt water buckets, beatings, shallow cutting you name it.

That being said I personally wouldn't be above smacking around a few prisoners if I knew the info would keep my people/citizens alive longer. Although it's crappy it's fair game to get answers from prisoners.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


let him torture his political opposition etc, then unleash them upon him.
CIA playing both sides against each other.

reply to post by SLAYER69


No you rushed in to claim this was just an excuse to "demonize the U.S. for whatever reason". This HRO report is not "whatever reason". But feel free to go on ignoring the truth. Maybe 20 years from now people will be able to look back at these events and see the truth of the CIA's involvement without screaming how were being 'demonized' for whatever reason.

How many American green backs were stuffed inside with ya?? Thatll tell you a little about the info gathered

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


Your whole thread is simply trying to slide it anyway you can. Going left is getting no joy because it's old News so now, some will try going right... [First the US are the bad guys for supposedly helping Gaddafi then the US are the bad guys for supposedly helping the rebels] Meanwhile leaving out every European country that were the main combatant belligerents and Canada [who were charge]

No offense, but politically speaking that's called Waffling

Meh..

Being for torture as a means of getting information about terror plots might be acceptable, but torture of innocents scooped up with little valid reasons, then handing them over to Libya for further torture only on the grounds that they are seen as anti-Quaddafi dissidents makes the US as guilty as Quaddafi. That was the price the US intelligence networks were willing to pay to be allowed to ply their trade in Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia.

We may never know the full extent of the guilt of the CIA in all of this, but we should not openly dismiss the allegations. Some serious accusations that dwarf the human rights violations the United States is always hurling at China.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Posts like this really call into question the reading comprehension of some ATS posters.

My first post called out the contradiction, between the HRO report and the long-standing allegations the United States was in fact backing the Gaddafi regime - which this report would seem to corroborate as we were 'rendering' these so-called dissidents into Gaddafi's hands for torture, or even engaged in their torture directly.

That does not correlate with the recent, post-Arab Spring allegations that the CIA were backing the Muslim Brotherhood, aka the rebels AGAINST Gaddafi.

As I said in the OP, we can't be both pro and anti-rebels, and pro- and anti-Gaddafi. This report shows the CIA was working WITH Gaddafi - not only in our handing over of dissidents to Gaddafi, but in torturing them as well. With that information, it would call into question the recent 'propaganda war' attacking everything pertaining to the Arab Spring movement - that it was 'backed by the CIA' or the CIA was really running it. I do not agree with that assumption - I believe Arab Spring was a natural, organic movement against Gaddafi, just as it was against Mubarak. I believe the CIA quickly found themselves on the wrong side of the movement, having been in bed with those two dictators. I believe that US media outlets were playing their part in negative reporting against the 'Arab Spring' by dutifully relating the CIA misinformation as "news". We have a perfect example of that right here:

Former Reporter Amber Lyon Exposes Massive Censorship At CNN

I saw first-hand that these regime claims were lies, and I couldn’t believe CNN was making me put what I knew to be government lies into my reporting.

Another case of the US being in bed with the standing regime, as it waged a brutal crackdown on dissidents. And a US media outlet had to government disinfo and spoon-feed it to their watchers as "news". You don't think that hasn't been going on with Libya and Egypt?

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Posts like this really call into question the reading comprehension of some ATS posters.

Thanks for not quite calling me an idiot

My first post called out the contradiction, between the HRO report and the long-standing allegations the United States was in fact backing the Gaddafi regime

What's the point? Gaddafi is gone. France, Italy, the UK and Canada did most of the killing....
[I noticed how you sidestepped that]

That does not correlate with the recent, post-Arab Spring allegations that the CIA were backing the Muslim Brotherhood, aka the rebels AGAINST Gaddafi.

Where have I've ever denied the CIA's involvement?
I called out that one "Allegations" for more proof than simply "A Libyan man said"

As I said in the OP, we can't be both pro and anti-rebels, and pro- and anti-Gaddafi. This report shows the CIA was working WITH Gaddafi - not only in our handing over of dissidents to Gaddafi, but in torturing them as well.

I know what you were pointing out.
I've read your OP.

With that information, it would call into question the recent 'propaganda war' attacking everything pertaining to the Arab Spring movement - that it was 'backed by the CIA' or the CIA was really running it. I do not agree with that assumption - I believe Arab Spring was a natural, organic movement against Gaddafi, just as it was against Mubarak. I believe the CIA quickly found themselves on the wrong side of the movement, having been in bed with those two dictators. I believe that US media outlets were playing their part in negative reporting against the 'Arab Spring' by dutifully relating the CIA misinformation as "news". We have a perfect example of that right here:

I have no illusions about how the MSM is manipulated,

AGAIN, Gaddafi is gone, Mubarak is gone and the Muslim Brotherhood is still here and have been here. Hell, they have been bothering good old Assad over in Syria.for decades.

Is that proof that they are or were but not now but wait yet again CIA supported back twenty years ago?

Do a little bit more research on the topic and the history of the Muslim Brotherhood.

reply to post by SLAYER69

What's the point? Gaddafi is gone. France, Italy, the UK and Canada did most of the killing....
[I noticed how you sidestepped that]

What's the point? How about recognizing the CIA being involved in extreme human rights violations to begin with? How about recognizing the USA aren't the saints some make them out to be - proof right here in the Human Rights Organizations report. The CIA engaged in torture. The CIA tortured these men on behalf of Libyan dictator Gaddafi. Maybe you and PvtHudson should take off the rose-colored glasses.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


Talk about lack of reading comprehension.
I'll ask for the second time...

Where have I denied the CIA's involvement?

AGAIN...

I called out the case in question and pointed out how you've completely sidestepped what I've written now for the third time about all the other European countries [And Canada's] participation in the actuall overthrowing of Gaddafi AND also, still can't make a legitimate case that the Muslim Brotherhood [Even though they have been active for decades] are a CIA creation or are supported [other than your theory and conjecture]

Nobody here has rose colored glasses about torture and CIA involvement.

Nice try though

Just pointing out the inconsistencies in this mess...

destroying someone's mind is as bad a destroying ones body.

but in the latters case, bones can heal, nails will grow back and scars will form.

put someone in prison, but this looks like vindictive punishment serving no other purpose than that.

The U.S. is demonized for supposedly helping the Gaddafi regime against Libyan protesters but are also equally demonized for supposedly helping those very same Libyan protesters against Gaddafi. I think some are just happy demonizing the U.S. for whatever reason.

plz re-read what you typed a few times.
do you really think it's a case of people just not liking american's?

reply to post by SLAYER69

Talk about lack of reading comprehension.
I'll ask for the second time...

Where have I denied the CIA's involvement?

AGAIN...

I called out the case in question and pointed out how you've completely sidestepped what I've written now for the third time about all the other European countries [And Canada's] participation in the actuall overthrowing of Gaddafi AND also, still can't make a legitimate case that the Muslim Brotherhood [Even though they have been active for decades] are a CIA creation or are supported [other than your theory and conjecture]

Nobody here has rose colored glasses about torture and CIA involvement.

You denied the CIA's involvement in your post, when you insinuated the CIA was not involved, and that this story was false -

You wrote in your first post:

So let me get this straight...

The U.S. is demonized for supposedly helping the Gaddafi regime against Libyan protesters but are also equally demonized for supposedly helping those very same Libyan protesters against Gaddafi.

I think some are just happy demonizing the U.S. for whatever reason.

Just admit it...

By claiming "some are happy demonizing the U.S. for whatever reason," you imply the story is false and nothing more than an excuse to demonize the US.

Then you wrote:

We can both agree that torture is wrong and I wont argue against the fact that the CIA are and have been involved with cases such as this but here again, there is no way to know if this case is even true or if the CIA were involved.

That's the problem with Blogs as sources. They can creatively write whatever the hell they want and someone will eat it up without being objective.

Again, by first incorrectly claiming the story came from a blog source, where anyone can "write whatever the hell they want", without recognizing the source of the OP is the Human Rights Organization (which has cited a large number of sources in their report, as well as having conducted many of the interviews with the former detainees).

This is another deflection tactic you employed - by belittling the source, implying it was written to demonize the US for whatever reason.

Is it too much to ask people actually read the source of the OP, then comment on that information, and not immediately launch into personal attacks (like PvtHudson does in virtually every thread topic)? Or, as you have done, go off on a pro-USA rah rah rant about how these threads are just some snide attack on the US, completely ignoring the evidence given, or trying to take the post off topic?

Even your comment:

I called out the case in question and pointed out how you've completely sidestepped what I've written now for the third time about all the other European countries [And Canada's] participation in the actuall overthrowing of Gaddafi

Here you go off on a tangent, in that this topic was about torture and rendition between the CIA and Gaddafi's regime long BEFORE Nato got involved in supporting the Libyan rebels. So I'm afraid it is you who are sidestepping the issue - the "U.S. Used This Torture Box to Interrogate Gadhafi’s Enemies" and commited human rights violations aiding/abetting Gaddafi.

From the link --

But what Human Rights Watch has uncovered in Libya tells a broader story. It’s a story about how repressive governments used the war on terrorism to get the U.S. to deliver their political opponents to their custody. It was as easy as calling them terrorists — which was enough for the U.S. to play along.

Damn straight, the USA got played the fools, the CIA willingly played along with some of these regimes, we gave them their dissidents when we caught them, helped torture them too, and in return they helped us in the war on anything we didn't like going on in the Mideast. One hand washing the other, right? In this case, we do a little torture for them, they do a little torture for us, the only people gettin hurt were the serfs in the middle.

the USA has blood on it's hand, they are guilty as Gadafi. His crimes at last caught up with him. When will the USA's?

ps I am a little shocked at the level some will go to defend the CIA.

You know that the world's going soft when sitting in a box and being poked a bit is considered torture. Soon insurgents will be wanting en suite bathrooms and laptops in their new cells at the Ritz. Don't try to interview them whilst they're playing on their Nintendo or they'll send Amnesty International an e-mail.

reply to post by Soshh


Your comment reminded me of Christopher Hitchens and Mancow Muller, relative to another form of torture, Waterboarding. Both men were very outspoken in their belief that waterboarding was not torture untill they decided to actually have the procedure done to them. Both men lasted only a few seconds of a very watered down version of the procedure (pun intended) Both these guys had the balls to actually attempt to educate themselves first hand on what is and is not torture. Both men walked away, shaken and with a completely different view on what is and is not torture. Mental torture of being in a confined space, or the fear of drowning as in waterboarding can do as much lasting harm to an individual as pliers, blowtorches or razors can do the flesh.

Again, what was done to these two men, was a kindergarten form of waterboarding, and they wimpered like babys nearly immediatly. My respect to these 2 men.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
The U.S. is demonized for supposedly helping the Gaddafi regime against Libyan protesters but are also equally demonized for supposedly helping those very same Libyan protesters against Gaddafi.

I think some are just happy demonizing the U.S. for whatever reason.

Just admit it...

Sadly, this summarizes the nature of political discourse in this country these days...

Case in point, Obama didn't do enough to save and create jobs. On the other, he's a ruthless socialist dictator meddling with the economy trying to create jobs. So he's demonized either way.

Sorry but we have become a schizophrenic nation.

reply to post by crawdad1914

Waterboarding was never intended to be used on journalists. In the real world, both men would likely tell you anything that you wanted to know before any sort of mild mistreatment was even considered, but that's only if they were to be found anywhere near a warzone in the first place.

It would have had about the same value as an experiment if children were waterboarded instead. I'd like to see a 'sitting in a box being poked' version though.

reply to post by crawdad1914


Yes, and Mancow was waterboarded under friendly, very mild conditions - knowing he had the power to stop it at any time by muttering the safety word. The victims of CIA waterboarding were tortured for hours on end, with malice, and some died during the interrogation. While some will say this was justified for the war on terror, it doesn't excuse the CIA torturing Libyans for the crime of opposing Gaddafi, and then handing those men over to that regime for further torture.