It's such an important yet overlooked aspect. I had read through many of those autopsy reports, and cannot describe the anguish every time I would hear someone talking about waterboarding whenever the topic of torture (er, enhanced interrogation techniques) came up, as though anything and everything else was not torture (er, EIT).

Here's a comment I had made on Marcy's blog a couple of weeks ago:

This is probably stating the obvious, but regarding detainee deaths: it seems that the earliest deaths while in US custody occurred in Aug 2002 (although I read earlier a report–on the ACLU site, that I cannot locate now–that the US claimed that NO deaths occurred prior to Nov 2002).

Wasn’t the Yoo oral authorization for torture given in July 2002?

So, for several months after the start of the war in Afghanistan, NO detainees died, but coincidentally, immediately after the green light is given on EIT/torture, the deaths (many categorized as “natural”) just start.

Isn’t that weird? Like, nobody had “heart attacks” and all those other “natural” deaths until after torture started?

The British may actually have been first in the water, but since Moazzam Begg doesn't give dates, I don't know what his before 9/11 comment means, unless you know more about the Bangladeshi tortures he refers to. I can give you a data point for the U.S. though, Joseph Matarazzo, former head of the APA (American Psychological Association), met with SERE psychologists in the Summer of 2001 about "using their skills" to "benefit the country".

The U.S. definitely did it Texas-style though, and the list of countries which went down the moral and social (and in some cases stability) tubes that Ahmed Rashid cites is an impressive black stain for the CIA. Britain and Israel were sort of pulling themselves out, after the RUC and the Landau Commission, but they seem to have found America's swan dive seductive.

We'll have to focus on torture and abuse by Our Forces in any case. Hopefully it will lead to a National Conversation about just how cruel and murderous -- and how ultimately counterproductive -- our latest efforts at Empire have been and are.

That would be rather nice wouldn't it? They could set up marquees and every body could be invited to afternoon tea cucumber sandwiches and and strawberries & cream and to chat & mingle all the while discussing the careless destruction of other peoples countries and lives. It would be a terribly civilised affair of course. And as a grand finale just before the fire work display to round off the occasion Nancy Pelosi could be invited to do her party piece and re-enact how she swept Impeachment of the table.

National conversation? You need a fucking good row and a good few arrests more like.

The only difference is that the Obama administration will work for the good of the citizens rather than exclusively for the corporations and the wealthiest.

When do you think he'll start doing that? He's been in office six months. To my knowledge, he hasn't arrested a single person for war crimes and I was under the impression the White House would be more appropriately named Goldman Sachs - Washington Office.

April 16, 2002 - “Dr. Bruce Jessen, the senior SERE psychologist at JPRA, circulated a draft exploitation plan to JPRA Commander Colonel Randy Moulton and other senior officials at the agency. The contents of that plan remains classified but Dr. Jessen’s initiative is indicative of the interest of JPRA’s senior leadership in expanding the agency’s role.” (DD) According to Jane Mayer, Jessen and colleague James Mitchell “reverse engineered” SERE training techniques. They also used the “learned helplessness” theory of Martin Seligman from his 1960’s experiments on dogs. [Mitchell is later identified as the CIA contractor who used these techniques in the first two months of Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation. [156] Seligman spoke about his theories to a high-level group, organized by CIA officials, at the Navy’s SERE school in San Diego during the spring of 2002. [55] DoD General Counsel Jim Haynes had solicited this information in December of 2001. [96] At a meeting just before 9/11/01 military psychologists were visited by former APA President Joseph Metarrazzo, whose words “crystallized their sense of mission”. They determined that their “marching orders” were to “help America and use our skills in any way we possibly can as a psychologist”, according to military psychologist and SERE instructor Bryce Lefever. [137] Lefever’s views are rebutted by fellow psychologist Stephen Soldz in “APA Ethics Policymaker Clarifies Defense of Torture; Reveals APA-Pentagon Link”. [145] APA created a group it called PENS [Psychological Ethics and National Security] It was kept secret from most of the membership of the APA. PEN’s members were nominated by the military and approved by the APA. Lefever was a member. [144] For more on this, see [145] See September 2003 for MG Geoffrey Miller’s internal report establishing a new role for health-care advisers.

Sources:

http://www.webdsi.com/jebbie/tline.html

I'm mindful of your contributions on this topic, and actually intended to give credit to you as one who enlightened me in this regard. I've done this before (click on my sig for a recent example), but I neglected to make reference to you in today's comment. But it was from you that I first become sensitized and aware of this general topic (which either through you or otherwise, led me to read McCoy).

More Intelligence Oversight Advised

By Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday, June 30, 2009 (see sig)

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has approved legislation intended to strengthen congressional oversight of sensitive intelligence matters, including covert operations.

Under language approved last week in the fiscal 2010 Intelligence Authorization Act, the House panel proposed doing away with provisions that allowed a president to limit disclosure of sensitive intelligence activities to the "Gang of Eight," the term used to identify the House speaker and minority leader, Senate majority and minority leaders, and the chairmen and ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence panels.

In its place, the House committee gave each intelligence committee, rather than the president, the legal authority to limit briefings to its own members. The president would be required to provide congressional overseers with "general information" on a covert operation or intelligence activity where there is a potential for loss of life, the outlay of significant funds, or a risk of loss of sources and methods. Briefings would also be required if the disclosure of an operation or activity could cause significant damage to diplomatic relations of the United States.

The limited members who receive such briefings would be permitted to report any objections to the national intelligence director, who must report them to the president in writing within 48 hours.

These changes are in direct reaction to incidents during the Bush administration in which harsh interrogation procedures, which were not considered to be covert operations, were initially reported to only the Gang of Eight and in some cases just the ranking intelligence panel members. In turn, the members who received those briefings were not allowed to disclose what they learned to anyone.

[...]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/29/AR2009062904321.html