In the years following the C.I.A.’s use of waterboarding on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man accused of orchestrating the September 11 attacks, questions have arisen about the ethics and controversy surrounding this interrogation technique. Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding a staggering 183 times, a method that is now considered a form of torture.
During a recent hearing in the case, Mohammed’s lawyer, Gary D. Sowards, raised concerns about the impact of waterboarding on his client. He presented an alternative theory to explain how Mohammed endured the ordeal, suggesting that the prisoner may have been using hand gestures commonly associated with Muslim prayers to signal to his interrogators during the simulated drowning sessions. This new perspective sheds light on the psychological and physical toll that such interrogation methods can have on individuals.
The use of waterboarding on Mohammed has sparked debate about the effectiveness and morality of “enhanced interrogation” techniques. While some argue that these methods are necessary to extract valuable information from high-profile detainees, others condemn them as inhumane and a violation of human rights.
It is worth noting that no other prisoner in U.S. history has been subjected to waterboarding as frequently as Mohammed. The recent testimony in the case provides a detailed account of how C.I.A. representatives utilized waterboarding at a secret prison in Poland in 2003, shedding light on the practices and evaluations of this controversial technique.
The discussion surrounding the use of waterboarding in the 9/11 case highlights the complex ethical and legal considerations that arise in the context of national security and counterterrorism efforts. As the military judge evaluates the admissibility of confessions obtained through torture, the case raises important questions about the boundaries of interrogation practices and the protection of individuals’ rights, even in the face of grave threats to national security.
Overall, the controversy surrounding waterboarding in the 9/11 case underscores the need for a nuanced and thoughtful approach to interrogations, one that upholds the principles of justice and human dignity while also addressing the imperative to prevent future acts of terrorism. By examining the ethical implications of such practices, we can strive to strike a balance between national security interests and the protection of fundamental human rights.
