Controversial article on Mormons and torture

[_Kishkumen]

Bush’s key torture architects were Mormon — a coincidence?

by Robert Herold

The Guantanamo torture scandal — or “enhanced interrogation” in the euphemism of the Bush Administration — revolves oddly around what might be termed the Mormon/BYU nexus. The architects of the torture techniques are James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, both Mormons with BYU ties who live in the Spokane area, where their consulting firm, Mitchell Jessen and Associates, is located. Then there’s their enabler, Jay Bybee, another devout Mormon, today even a scout leader; he also studied at Brigham Young University. As a Justice Department lawyer, Bybee wrote the memo that allowed Mitchell and Jessen’s techniques to be put to use.

Such a confluence of seeming coincidence hasn’t happened so dramatically since Iran-Contra when all the major violators of the law were Naval Academy graduates — Oliver North, John Poindexter and Robert McFarland. Robert Timberg, an Academy graduate himself, wrote a book, The Nightingale’s Song, explaining why these men — moral, honest, driven to service — could get themselves into such a mess. Just a coincidence? Timberg discovered that it wasn’t, that there were reasons these three acted as they did.

And the Mormons? What gives? It’s a question begging to be reflected upon. After all, the LDS church is now America’s fourth largest with an ever-increasing presence. In 2012 we are likely to see not just one Mormon candidate (Mitt Romney), but perhaps two (Jon Hunstman, the governor of Utah and, potentially, even a stronger candidate).

Mitchell and Jessen are psychologists and former Air Force instructors in SERE (“Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape”). Since their work has been revealed, they are laying low. No one can make contact — not the New York Times, not even Jane Mayer, author of The Dark Side, a study of their “enhanced interrogation.” The only communication the two have released thus far was a statement to the effect that they were proud of their contribution to the war on terror.

Mayer’s book fills in some gaps missed by the press. Roll the clock back to the spring of 2002, eight months or so after 9/11. “Enemy combatants” had been rounded up and the interrogations had begun. First on the scene was the FBI. The two primary interrogators were pleased at the progress they were making, using tried-and-true interrogation techniques. These investigators blamed 9/11 less on the brilliance of the terrorists than on the ineptitude of their own agency, the CIA, politicians and red tape. What the hijackers pulled off wasn’t rocket science; it took months of screw-ups by the government for their attacks to succeed.

These two FBI agents, Ali Soufan and Steve Gaudin, using what they described as standard FBI “rapport-building” techniques, had made good progress. They got more details of the attack, and they identified the chief planner as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (information that was later claimed a breakthrough by the Bush administration via their “enhanced” methods).

While CIA Director George Tenet was excited to hear this information, he wasn’t pleased to hear that it had come from the FBI. He wanted his own interrogation team. It was about this time that the CIA connected with Mitchell and Jessen. The two former survival school instructors were hired to develop their experimental protocol for interrogation to be used by the CIA. This protocol involved “reverse engineering” of SERE. What was a course in evasion became a format for brutal interrogation — even torture. The CIA loved it.

Mayer observes that Mitchell was an odd choice for such a job. He had no experience at interrogation. He knew nothing about the Muslim religion. He spoke no Arabic. He had no background on terrorism in the Middle East.

Enter stage right the third Mormon, Jay Bybee. He was doing a stint in the Department of Justice when the White House asked for a legal opinion regarding torture: What it was, what it wasn’t and under what circumstances would laws be broken. Bybee, working with another Assistant Attorney General, John Yoo, and under direct pressure from the White House, wrote and signed the now infamous Bybee Memorandum. (Soon after, Bybee was given a lifetime appointment to the Ninth Circuit Court of Apeals by President Bush.)

A hodge-podge of a memo, roundly criticized by his peers, Bybee stumbles his way through a thicket of cases, some of which would seem to be only marginally relevant, toward a conclusion that was obviously foregone. I summarize: Almost nothing you might do to the prisoner can be construed as torture — and besides, if the president authorizes it, then whatever you do has to be legal; that’s what being Commander in Chief is all about.

We’ll find out how well these opinions hold up as Congress, the Justice Department and various courts take up the issue.

Was the Mormon connection just a coincidence? I don’t think so. My hypothesis: Mormon culture sends out messages to the faithful that could well push these three to do exactly what they did: compliance to authority, need to maintain order, group thinking, professional success as evidence of right living, patriotism, affinity for the military life and loyalty. All bedrock Mormon stuff.

But to what effect? As Mayer and others are beginning to conclude, the CIA’s torture program not only violated long-held American principles, but it wasn’t even effective. Worse yet, judging by the timeline and what else was happening during the spring of 2002, the entire effort may have been less about making us safe than it was about beating a connection between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein out of some enemy combatant.

Robert Herold is a BYU graduate.

[_bcspace]

All this hyperventilating is not about civil rights but about pressing home the terrorist victory in Obama's election.

[_Kishkumen]

All this hyperventilating is not about civil rights but about pressing home the terrorist victory in Obama's election.

Do you ever get tired of repeating the same drivel on multiple boards?

[_bcspace]

All this hyperventilating is not about civil rights but about pressing home the terrorist victory in Obama's election.

Do you ever get tired of repeating the same drivel on multiple boards?

At least over here we can discuss the practical application of the gospel. Over there, we can't unless you only want the left wing pov. That would violate "opposition in all things". So here we are.

Even you admit the article is "controversial".

[_Kishkumen]

At least over here we can discuss the practical application of the gospel. Over there, we can't unless you only want the left wing pov. That would violate "opposition in all things". So here we are.

So you made the same comment on more than two boards? Really?

[_Kishkumen]

Even you admit the article is "controversial".

Because it is. But your "response" did not exactly address the most salient issue. Rather, it addressed your personal political concerns, which is what I have come to expect.

[_Ray A]

left wing

That's all BC and Droopy know what to talk about. Left, right, left, right, left, right.

They are more converted to politics than religion. If you vote Democrat, you can't be a "true Mormon".

[_bcspace]

Even you admit the article is "controversial".

Because it is. But your "response" did not exactly address the most salient issue.

Yes it did. The article automatically assumes "torture" is bad and pins it on the Mormons whose doctrine is conservative and whose membership is largely conservative. This is Obama-speak for building self serving strawman problems and Obama's election was a clear victory for the terrorists (ostensibly being tortured) because our war on them winds down and the policy becomes one of appeasement and the abandonment of Israel.

But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know this...

[_bcspace]

That's all BC and Droopy know what to talk about. Left, right, left, right, left, right.

Few dare to challenge to get details probably because they know we're right (pun intended)

They are more converted to politics than religion.

Say rather that we actually apply the teachings of our religion to everyday life, such as politics. I don't recall starting this thread. Perhaps it's someone else who is overly concerned with politics....

If you vote Democrat, you can't be a "true Mormon".

That is correct. To vote Democrat is to put yourself in opposition to significant LDS doctrine and policy in almost every way.

[_Kishkumen]

Yes it did. The article automatically assumes "torture" is bad and pins it on the Mormons whose doctrine is conservative and whose membership is largely conservative.

The subject line set the context for the discussion. You want to discuss something else. If someone else takes you up on it, fine. I am not.