@Old Trooper: For some reason I missed your last comment in this post. I’ve heard this before but it sounded a bit of a stretch, like one of those email forwards, so I tried to confirm it with Snopes.

Having been a long-time practitioner of Filipino martial arts, stories of the Moros and of the Philippine Insurrection period has always been a part of the history of the warrior arts that came out of the Philippines. From the issuing of the .45 caliber for more stopping power, to the name “leathernecks” for Marines (could never confirm it as other than legend as it relates to the Marine experience against the Moro jurimentados), to modern boxing today (drawing influence from Filipino methods).

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@JohnMcClane: Hey John,

I don’t know if you still swing by FA, but you should take a look at a post I did recently. Also, I finished reading Matthew Alexander’s latest book, “Kill and Capture”. It was an enjoyable read and I may do a blogpost book review on it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Thanks for the feedback. It helps sort things out.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

From the Moro Rebellion, 1911, Gen. John J. Pershing…fact or fiction?

HOW TO STOP ISLAMIC TERRORISTS…… it worked once in our History…

Once in U.S. history an episode of Islamic terrorism was very quickly stopped. It happened in the Philippines about 1911, when Gen. John J. Pershing was in command of the garrison. There had been numerous Islamic terrorist attacks, so “Black Jack” told his boys to catch the perps and teach them a lesson.

Forced to dig their own graves, the terrorists were all tied to posts, execution style. The U.S. soldiers then brought in pigs and slaughtered them, rubbing their bullets in the blood and fat. Thus, the terrorists were terrorized; they saw that they would be contaminated with hogs’ blood. This would mean that they could not enter Heaven, even if they died as terrorist martyrs.
nd Geneva Convention
All but one was shot, their bodies dumped into the grave, and the hog guts dumped atop the bodies. The lone survivor was allowed to escape back to the terrorist camp and tell his brethren what happened to the others. This brought a stop to terrorism in the Philippines for the next 50 years.

Pointing a gun into the face of Islamic terrorists won’t make them flinch.

They welcome the chance to die for Allah. Like Gen. Pershing, we must show them that they won’t get to Muslim heaven (which they believe has an endless supply of virgins) but instead will die with the hated pigs of the devil.
******************************************************************
Now I tend to treat this as fiction, however I also treat most claims of detainee abuse in the same fashion. Our Military has punished by Courts Martial anyone tried and convicted of UCMJ and Geneva Conventions violations, harshly but fairly. The alleged Air Force Interrogator, as yet unidentified has some serious questions to answer. Any allegations need to be investigated, period. Any Officer that cut a book deal and revealed details of those operations should be cashiered and sent packing or should have preferred formal charges. Your Oath of Office demands that, Freedom of the Press not withstanding. You are either an Officer or a Journo. You can’t do both unless your functional area is Public Information Officer. The Army/Navy/Air Force Newsies do not interrogate detainees. So the fictional Air Force Officer gets zero credibility with me.

The Abu Ghraib Courts Martials were flawed as the Chain of Command was negligent and derelict in both Command and Supervision all the way up to the MP Brigade Commander.
Only the enlisted were brought up on charges. If all of that mischief took place and Command was unaware, they were incompetent and negligent and should have been charged.

I can absolutely assure you all that any detainees captured on any Ops I was involved in were turned over to the Cage in the same shape they were when captured. Combat Lifesaver or Medic treatment were administered and there was no interrogation in the field. That is the job of folks that run the cage. My units never had inbeded newsies due to the nature of the Ops. Classified Ops have no newsies stringing along. All of You Need to Know freaks need to understand that. Classified Missions lead to more Missions that are Classified. No, unless you are directly involved, You Do Not have a Need to Know. Period.

Mr. Alexander comes off like either an Officer in violation of His Oath and the UCMJ or some clown with a book deal that never served and there are a few of those rascals out there.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@wardogs said:

I believe that waterboarding, as implemented by our interrogators, does not rise to the standard of torture and was carefully controlled so that it wouldn’t. That is the reason that so much attention was given to the legal side of the matter and such care was undertaken in the administration of not just that, but all “enhanced techniques”. Many disagree, including some of the interrogators themselves. That’s life. There is no doubt that “traditional methods” of interrogation are effective in many cases. It’s also apparent that in some cases they are not.

Thank You! Similar to what I have been saying, but you did it much better!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Okay I will bite on McClane and Alexander’s chatter about the Doolittle Raider getting waterboarded.

Source: The Doolittle Raid – America’s daring first strike against Japan. Carrol V. Glines. Schiffer Military History. 1991. Pg 170-171.

Quote – “The Japanese took me out of my cell about three o’clock in the afternoon of April 24,” Nielsen recalled, “and started questioning me about our mission through an interpreter. I gave them my name, rank, and serial number, and told them that was all the information I was going to give.”

“The first thing they did was to put pencils between my fingers, squeezing my hands and forcing the pencils up and down causing the skin to break.” When he wouldn’t talk, Nielsen was stretched out on the floor and given the infamous “water cure.” Four soldiers sat on his arms and legs while a fifth placed a wet towel over his face and poured water on it. Every time he gasped for breath, more water was poured on the towel, which had the effect of drowning him.

The more they tortured, the more Nielsen was determined he was not going to talk. His resolution caused him to be subjected to another favorite Oriental torture. A bamboo stick about three feet long and two inches in diameter was placed behind his knees and he was forced to kneel and sit back as far as he could. One of the soldiers held him in this position while another jumped up and down on his thighs. Execruciating as it was, Nielsen still didn’t give in to their questions. – End quote

So taken in toto, the water cure Nielsen was subjected to was in fact torture designed to punish the prisoner for adhering on what type of information the prisoner can give his captors. What Nielsen gave would be used by the International Red Cross to ensure Nielsen’s family was notified he was still alive. What the Japanese wanted was information of a military nature, which is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. The Japanese were charged with war crimes for a simple reason that it seems Major Alexander forgets. Japan and the United States were signatories to the Geneva Conventions in regards to treatment of military prisoners from before World War II. Japan throughout the war it started in the Pacific constantly ignored the Geneva Conventions by beating prisoners, starving prisoners, making prisoners work in war industries, and for executing prisoners of war. So it was legally proper to charge Japanese officers and men with crimes that violated the Geneva Conventions.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Good adds, Wardog. He may not feel comfortable disclosing his real name (nor do I think interrogators should…). But he sure doesn’t mind throwing his photo out. The Harper’s link in my “Update” in comment #21 carries a photo with it…. in fatigues.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

One actually told me, “I thought you would torture me, and when you didn’t, I decided that everything I was told about Americans was wrong. That’s why I decided to cooperate.”

You have to be kidding me? This line of reasoning is just beyond ludicrous. Supposed hard core fighters decide to snitch because they were treated well? Give me a break. I tell ya one thing, if someone were to give me this line, but substituted a local gangster I deal with on a daily basis, I would laugh my ass off….and these hard core Islamic freaks make the guys I deal with look like little school girls.

Beyond retarded.

And these lefties fall for this stuff daily….just pathetic.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’ve only read one of Matthew Alexander’s book’s; “I’m Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq” and I have several problems with both recent articles in the media, that book and about Matthew Alexander himself, especially the inflammatory quote by a writer who doesn’t even have the courage to use his real name, (allegedly because he fears for the safety of his family). I truly question who Matthew Alexander really is and if he was even in the military, or was an FBI interrogator and if he actually interrogated anyone. Maybe he is a complete phony, maybe not.

To state as he did in his book though, that “The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001″ is absurd. Where is the evidence to support such a ridiculous, inflammatory statement? There is none, and it’s not “fair to say,” or imply, there is.

I will go even further and say that OUR interrogations saved thousands and maybe even tens of thousands of American lives. Of course I have more evidence to support my opinion than M.A. has to support his.

I get the uneasy feeling that this guy is just trying to sell books, hoping that many people will accept everything he says as fact. That feeling is bolstered by his choice of venues…HuffPo, antiwar.com, etc. as well as his fast and loose treatment of facts.

For instance, it was Jordanian intelligence forces that arrested and questioned the Iraqi customs agent, Ziad Khalaf Raja al-Karbouli, who is credited with giving up the whereabouts of Zarqawi’s safe houses, not Alexander or his “team”, that led to the final demise of one of Iraq’s most feared terrorists.

You can bet your last dollar the Jordanians didn’t sweet talk this guy into giving up the location of Zarqawi. And Alexander didn’t get the $25M reward, either.

I agree with one thing however, “What’s Not Said Is More Important Than What Is Said”, and he is not saying some important things. He’s not saying that the convictions in the Tokyo trials were for a whole laundry list of offenses of which waterboarding was only a minor part. He also doesn’t say that the “water cure” as practiced by the Japanese was nothing like the controlled methods used on the three terrorists that we interrogated. Their method was to force water into the victim until their bellies were distended and then to beat them with clubs, kick, punch and jump on their stomachs until it was expelled and to sometimes use salt water that actually killed them.

He offers nothing but anecdotal “proof” that our imprisonment and treatment of detainees “caused thousands of Muslim men to take up arms” but doesn’t mention that the vast majority of foreign fighters came to Iraq after the call by OBL to make Iraq the focus of Jihad against the West, long before the Abu Ghraib incident. Nor does he mention that the atrocities committed by those fighters against the Iraqis, especially by AQI, was the main reason we were able to accomplish the Anbar Awakening.

He mentions Ali Soufan and how he “successfully” interrogated Abu Zubaydah, but doesn’t mention that Padilla was a fairly low level player, he gave no information other than his name and that it was US investigators that tracked and arrested him, (he was arrested in Chicago), and that it was already known that KSM was involved in the planning of 9/11. He may be upset that “others took over” (what others, weren’t they all on the same team?), but that suggests to me that his methods, as Cheney said, were not working or were not timely enough and that it wasn’t until after Zubaydah was waterboarded that he gave up the alias (Muhktar) and location of KSM and other information. (In fairness, Soufan disputes that, saying he got KSM’s “nickname” first but it wasn’t immediately connected to KSM).

If Matthew Alexander is actually who he says he is, he is an FBI interrogator, not from the CIA or our military. FBI interrogators like Soufan were given military credentials but as Soufan points out, they were not legitimate and would cause major problems for their bearers if caught. I suspect his FBI affiliation because he has the same timelines, beefs and prejudices as Soufan and displays the same inter-agency rivalry.

Bottom line, I believe that waterboarding, as implemented by our interrogators, does not rise to the standard of torture and was carefully controlled so that it wouldn’t. That is the reason that so much attention was given to the legal side of the matter and such care was undertaken in the administration of not just that, but all “enhanced techniques”. Many disagree, including some of the interrogators themselves. That’s life. There is no doubt that “traditional methods” of interrogation are effective in many cases. It’s also apparent that in some cases they are not. Soufan himself states that it took him almost three months, (March to June) to uncover from Zubaydah just those two items of intel that he did get. I do however take with a grain of salt information from those with a political agenda or who are selling books or have other financial or partisan interests that affect their opinions.

As to the original subject of the OP, Cheney spanked Bambi like a red-headed step child. To add to the utter hypocrisy of the One, it now comes out that he is “outsourcing interrogations” to Islamic countries that don’t share his delicate sensibilities on prisoner treatment…

Good News! Obama Outsources Interrogation Of Islamists
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2009/05/24/good-news-obama-outsources-interrogation-of-islamists/

Maybe it’s not the methods that he objects to so much, but the political flack…

Renditions lite?

wardogs

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I was curious, so already ahead of you, McClane. I was reading his WaPo op-ed where he was whining about how “tortured” he was about what he saw in Iraq.

INRE his penning of interrogation methods, he claims it’s not classified because it’s all in the Army Field Manual. Comes across as an arrogant type by claiming he suggested the Sunni Awakening to Gen. Casey and he didn’t “respond”. Guess he wants some post-surge credit.

Apparently, he spent only 5 months in Iraq, and that commenced in March of 2006… the hey day of the jihad groups attempting to fuel a civil war by pressuring the Sunnis to cooperate and arming them, plus blowing up the mosques. In short, Mr. Alexander was interrogating mostly Iraq Sunnis, not AQ/Gitmo high value types. That is a completely different animal. Many Iraqis were forced into the service of the Zarqawi’s and AQI by fear and assassination of elders and clerics. Not exactly a tough mark to question.

Yet on that, he says:

I know the counter-argument well — that we need the rough stuff for the truly hard cases, such as battle-hardened core leaders of al-Qaeda, not just run-of-the-mill Iraqi insurgents. But that’s not always true: We turned several hard cases, including some foreign fighters, by using our new techniques. A few of them never abandoned the jihadist cause but still gave up critical information. One actually told me, “I thought you would torture me, and when you didn’t, I decided that everything I was told about Americans was wrong. That’s why I decided to cooperate.”

Right… a “hard core” jihadi gives up info because he wasn’t tortured? Of course, he bandies about Zarqawi’s name, but doesn’t mention any “hard core” detainee he had…. nor what info they gave up that was actionable. Why not? He just bragged about his intel INRE Zarqawi’s location and ultimate death by bombing.

Perhaps he’s just good at the art of embellishment.

According to him, he says he personally conducted over 300 interrogations, and supervised over 1000. During a five month period, that means he was averaging 5 interrogations a day personally, plus supervising 15 more daily. Assuming they did 30 minutes each, that’s a 10 hour day, 7 days a week, for five months … without a break… of interrogation.

Why does horse manure still come to mind?

It was his five month tour in 2006 where he proclaims he knows why the jihadis came to Iraq… even tho they had been coming BEFORE Abu Ghraib.

I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq….. snip…. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001.

Really? Considering he didn’t have the jihad hard cores, and the majority of his detainees were Iraqis, how does he come to that conclusion with such certainty? And why does he ignore their presence not only pre-Abu Ghraib, but for the decade prior to OIF?

Again, horse manure. He comes across as a man so completely self-absorbed with his own smug morality that he misses the fact he, himself, aids and abets the enemy with such accusations based not on fact, but emotion.

How many foreign jihadis were in those 300 interrogations, Mr. Alexander? What was the ratio of jihadis to Iraqis? And how do you know they aren’t telling you exactly what they want you to tell the press… in other words, ride the Abu Ghraib wave of PR?

Makes me wonder just who was manipulating whom.

UPDATE: I found the answer to my question above. A Dec 2008 Harper’s interview quotes him of only have one true jihadi in all his interrogations. The rest were Iraqis who were aligned with the jihad movements for a variety of reasons… mostly, survival.

This also means that those who are telling Alexander “they” came to Iraq because of Abu Ghraib are not the foreign jihad fighters themselves, but the Iraqis. And of course, the jihad groups would use that negative PR to justify to the locals why they are present in Iraq, trying to start a civil war. In other words, Alexander’s firm opinion is totally based on hearsay by Iraqis, who were manipulated and strong armed by the jihad groups. They merely parroted the jihad talking points they were fed. END UPDATE

Like or Dislike: 0  0