Gitmo torture rumor

Supposedly – this is thinly sourced – a story is to break Monday that three detainee deaths in 2006 were torture-murders, with the torture and the cover-up of the cause of death ordered “from the top.”

I picked this up as a rumor, from someone who wouldn’t deliberately b.s. me but reported only that he’d heard it from a secondary source. So I pass it along for what it may be worth.

According to the story:

1. Three of the deaths at Guantanamo in 2006 were torture-homicides: the victims died in the process of “enhanced interrogation.”

2. The deaths were covered up.

3. Both the orders to torture and the orders to cover up “came from the top.”

4. There is now eyewitness (participant?) testimony.

5. The story is set to break Monday.

If the story actually breaks as reported, it will be interesting to watch how the Right divides into those who express disgust, those who refuse to believe it, and those who justify it.

Update Confirmed, except for “came from the top.” And the new Administration seems to have been uninterested in breaking the cover-up.

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact: Markarkleiman-at-gmail.com

51 thoughts on “Gitmo torture rumor”

  1. Joel: "The critique is based on the premise that it is wrong to assassinate anyone’s character unless you reasonably believe the facts to be true. "

    In this case, your critique was a lie; by now enough facts have come to light that it's unreasonable to disbelieve any half-way reasonable rumor about the Bush administration.

Comments are closed.