3 The World‎ > ‎7 Organisations‎ > ‎Military‎ > ‎Abuse of Torture‎ > ‎

Intelligence Cycle

UNFINISHED CONTENT

The Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual 1983 states that the intelligence cycle consists of four phases, requirements, collection, processing and dissemination, which again leads to further requirements. Processing should determine the reliability of the source and the significant of the information it says.

Examination of “The Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual 1983” and the document titled “Kubark Counter Intelligence Interrogation 1963” shows that there are five stages, arrest, screening, planning interrogation, conducting interrogation and disposition.

When intelligence work is of a poor quality this loop leads to an escalating cycle of detainments and generates an escalating cycle of descent which can be seen in the formation of new cells that bare little relation to al-Qaeda or the Taliban. 

Processing 

Imprisonment and torture of persons based only on suspicion, is a rapidly growing means, used by coalition forces, to attempt to gain information in relation to the opposition.
Examination of “The Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual 1983” and the document titled “Kubark Counter Intelligence Interrogation 1963” shows that the basic process runs as follows;
The five stages regarding the source are, arrest, screening, planning interrogation, conducting interrogation and disposition.

Arrest

Imprisonment and torture of persons based only on suspicion, is a rapidly growing means, used by coalition forces, to attempt to gain information in relation to the opposition.

but some military intelligence officers estimate that between 70% and 90% of those imprisoned have been arrested by mistake.

Arrest Purpose


Assets, sources, subjects. non-citizens. High value detainees.
Arrest criteria establish

Enemy Combatant

The Military Commissions Act 2006  expands the definition of “combatant” to include those who have “purposefully and materially” supported hostilities against the United States, even if they have not taken part in the hostilities themselves, and even if they are arrested far from the battlefield. This turns ordinary civilians – such as a mother giving food to her combatant son, an individual who sends money to a banned group, or a U.S. resident who commits a criminal act unrelated to armed conflict – into “combatants” who can be placed in military custody and hauled before a military commission.

An additional – and circular – provision specifies that anyone who has been determined to be an “unlawful enemy combatant” by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal (the military boards convened to allow detainees at Guantanamo Bay to contest their status as combatants, called CSRTs) or “another competent tribunal” established by the president or the defense secretary is presumed to be an enemy combatant for the purposes of military commissions.

“(7) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT.—The term ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ means an individual determined by or under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense—
“(A) to be part of or affiliated with a force or organization—including but not limited to al Qaeda, the Taliban, any international terrorist organization, or associated forces—engaged in hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents in violation of the law of war;
“(B) to have committed a hostile act in aid of such a force or organization so engaged; or
“(C) to have supported hostilities in aid of such a force or organization so engaged.
“This definition includes any individual determined by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal, before the effective date of this Act, to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant, but excludes any alien determined by the President or the Secretary of Defense (whether on an individualized or collective basis), or by any competent tribunal established under their authority, to be
d(i) a lawful enemy combatant (including a prisoner of war), or
d(ii) a protected person whose trial by these military commissions would be inconsistent with Articles 64-76 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949. For purposes of this section, the term “protected person” refers to the category of persons described in Article 4 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949.
“(6) GENEVA CONVENTIONS.—The term ‘Geneva Conventions’ means the international conventions signed at Geneva on August 12, 1949, including common Article 3.



~HR6166, The Definition of Enemy Combatant, ushering in the utter destruction of Habeas Corpus in its mirrored form SB3930 (actually signed into law) 

the President has announced that he can sweep any of the millions of non-citizens off the streets of America and imprison them for life in a military jail without charge, court review, or due process. It is unprecedented, unlawful, and un-American.

There is no question that the Military Commissions Act, given the language it now contains, grants -- in principle -- full dictatorial powers to the executive. As I explained in the earlier essay, the executive and certain entities it controls can designate anyone, including any American citizen, as an "unlawful enemy combatant." That person can then be imprisoned for the rest of his life, with no recourse whatsoever. Period.

Arrest Criteria


The criteria for arrest remains unclear since it does not appear necessary to determine that a person is an “enemy combatant” before arrest takes place.

Arrest

The Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual 1983 states that “The manner and timing of arrest can contribute substantially to the interrogator's purposes and should be planned to achieve surprise and the maximum amount of mental discomfort” it continues “The subject should be rudely awakened and immediately blindfolded and handcuffed.”
This has been edited slightly from Kubark and moved from the section on coercive interrogation out into the general text which is a cause for grave concern as it implies that even those who will face normal interrogation should still be arrested brutally.
The red cross comments

Screening


“some large stations are able to conduct preliminary psychological screening before interrogation starts. The purpose of screening is to provide the interrogator, in advance, with a reading on the type and characteristics of the interrogatee. It is recommended that screening be conducted whenever personnel and facilities permit, unless it is reasonably certain that the interrogation will be of minor importance or that the interrogatee is fully cooperative.”

Planning Interrogation


Conducting Interrogation


Disposition

 








© Tom de Havas 2011. The information under this section is my own work it may be reproduced without modification but must include this notice.






Many of these techniques are interpretations of the CIA's manual “KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation”, produced in 1963. A derivative of this is the “Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual 1983” which forms part of a course for use by governments or rebel organisations sympathetic to US interests. This list includes many Latin American governments.
The documents them selves warn that if coercive techniques are to be used there is a grave risk. Quote, “Moral considerations aside, the imposition of external techniques of manipulating people carries with it the grave risk of later lawsuits, adverse publicity, or other attempts to strike back. Interrogations conducted under compulsion or duress are especially likely to involve illegality and to entail damaging consequences for KUBARK.” However this does not stop the manuals from considering these techniques.”
Comments