Torture

Report: C.I.A. Torture Program was Aided by American Psychological Association

The A.P.A. is accused of allowing Bush administration officials "to actually help write the association's policies."

|

As reported by James Risen in the New York Times, a just-released report co-authored by seven "dissident health professionals and human rights activists," accuses the American Psychological Association of providing ethical and scientific cover to the Bush administration's use of "enhanced interrogation" or what is non-euphemistically known as torture.

If the psychologists say it's ok…
Wikimedia

Risen writes:

The report is the first to examine the association's role in the interrogation program. It contends, using newly disclosed emails, that the group's actions to keep psychologists involved in the interrogation program coincided closely with efforts by senior Bush administration officials to salvage the program after the public disclosure in 2004 of graphic photos of prisoner abuse by American military personnel at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

"The A.P.A. secretly coordinated with officials from the C.I.A., White House and the Department of Defense to create an A.P.A. ethics policy on national security interrogations which comported with then-classified legal guidance authorizing the C.I.A. torture program," the report's authors conclude.

The involvement of health professionals in the Bush-era interrogation program was significant because it enabled the Justice Department to argue in secret opinions that the program was legal and did not constitute torture, since the interrogations were being monitored by health professionals to make sure they were safe.

Crucially, according to the report, the A.P.A. dispensed with any skepticism of the administration's tactics just as "the C.I.A. torture program was threatened from within and outside the Bush administration." 

One of the report's co-authors, Stephen Soldz, told Risen in an email:

"Like clockwork, the A.P.A. directly addressed legal threats at every critical juncture facing the senior intelligence officials at the heart of the program. In some cases the A.P.A. even allowed these same Bush officials to actually help write the association's policies."

The A.P.A. will not offer comment on the report, pending the results of an independent review they commissioned last November

Read the full report here, and check out Reason's expansive archive on torture here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

28 responses to “Report: C.I.A. Torture Program was Aided by American Psychological Association

  1. And having women point at genitalia is the best they could come up with?

    1. Fucking psychologists are useless.

      1. Hey! I’m a….

        *blushes*

        Uh….nev….never….

        LOOK! A SQUIRREL!

        1. Not you, of course. Only those other ones.

    2. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……
      http://www.work-cash.com

  2. OT: The British had a 90 minute special where voters got to grill the leaders of the political parties on a range of issues.

    Here’s what I don’t understand: The three party leaders present were Cameron for the Tories, Milliband for Labour and Clegg for the Lib-Dems. Why was Nigel Farage not present? I just saw a poll today saying UKIP is currently favored to have 14% of the vote in the next election while the Lib-Dems are polling at 5%. The Green Party is actually neck and neck with the Lib-Dems.

    Is there any better evidence that the UK ruling class doesn’t give a shit about the public when they don’t have the Green leader or Nigel Farage present but allow a has-been dying party like the Lib-Dems to have this spotlight? If UKIP overtakes the Lib-Dems they very easily could be part of the next governing coalition in the UK, so why on Earth does Farage not get invited to these events?

    1. so why on Earth does Farage not get invited to these events?

      Because he would be counterproductive to their mutliculturalist destruction of English society.

    2. The three party leaders present were Cameron for the Tories, Milliband for Labour and Clegg for the Lib-Dems. Why was Nigel Farage not present? I just saw a poll today saying UKIP is currently favored to have 14% of the vote in the next election while the Lib-Dems are polling at 5%. The Green Party is actually neck and neck with the Lib-Dems.

      For obvious reasons the Conservatives don’t want to be compared to the UKIP and the left-wing parties are just following the typical leftist belief that you can sneer an opponent away.

    3. Because they don’t want to give Farage any legitimacy. They’ve been putting out propaganda that he wants to eat babies while drowning refugees in the Thames while the speeches of Mr Hilter of Minehead play in the background.

      Seeing him on TV would make the groupthink harder to enforce. People forget that the BBC is the propaganda arm of the British Government.

      1. The UKIP is far from libertarian, but I like Farage personally and would pay to see him take Millibrand to task for promising to outlaw “Islamophobia”.

        1. I would say the UKIP is at least libertarian in the sense that they are resisting having the UK turned into a province of the Euro multi-culti leftist superstate.

      2. ^Pretty much this.^

        Perhaps even more than our own, the British political establishment holds the electorate in contempt. Voters response to this has been what has driven the rise of the UKIP. Letting Farage on the stage would dispel the illusion of broad unanimity amongst all right-thinking people.

        1. I’m surprised he hasn’t been disappeared.

        2. Similar thing happened in Turkey in the mid-90’s. The “major” parties were completely out of touch and talking about technical economic shit that only a university grad could relate to. It gave a nice, big grassroots opening to the Islamic-oriented parties. the swooped into the gecekondus and promised a chicken in every pot and all that shite.

        3. So why do people at HyR, bloggers & commenters, take politicians to task for trying to gauge public opinion & give voters what they want, even if it makes them, the politicians, look silly in the process?

  3. Report: C.I.A. Torture Program was Aided by American Psychological Association

    Do you mean to tell me that the various medical associations and university academics are nothing more than court intellectuals? No way!!! Couldn’t be!

    1. I know I put my shocked face somewhere around here.

    2. Psychologists are not physicians, and the American Psychological Association is not a medical association.

      1. A categorical distinction of such profound gravity that it changes everything. They’re not court intellectuals after all. What a relief!

        1. More like court jesters, I reckon.

      2. So they don’t have an ethics statement to uphold? Every professional society does.

        1. “My ethics are like my principles – subject to change…”

  4. State-backed cartel supports the state, news at 11.

    1. The science is settled!

  5. You need psychologists to figure out what people like & dislike?

    1. Does this hurt? “Ow!” Answered. A little child could figure out how to torture someone, unless that someone is extremely clever & pretending to dislike what s/he likes & vice versa.

  6. The Scientologists are going to have a field day with this!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.