Released Gitmo Detainees: al-CIA-duh Alert

Marcy Wheeler makes a good catch:

What are the chances that some, or even most, of these "recidivist" terrorists are actually men we recruited to spy for us? That is, they may have "returned to terrorism or militant activity," but did so with our blessing, with the understanding they'd send back information on what those militant groups were doing.

We do know the US and its allies were using those captured as spies of a sort. Just last weekend, for example, newspapers in the UK reported that an "Informant A" was used by the Brits and Morrocco to try to get Binyam Mohamed to "cooperate" with his captives.

Mohamed, 31, says that in September 2002, after his 'extraordinary rendition' to North Africa, an agent known only as Informant A told him the torture would stop if he gave intelligence to the British.

The offer from the agent, a UK citizen of Moroccan descent, suggests that British security forces had the power to end his treatment, Mohamed's lawyer claims.

Mohamed already knew the agent from London.

[snip]

Clive Stafford Smith said: 'The Moroccans told Mr Mohamed that Informant A was working with the British Government and pressed Mr Mohamed to do the same if he wanted to end his torture.

[snip]

Informant A is said to have fought alongside Osama Bin Laden in the caves of Tora Bora.

He was said to have been captured and held at a U.S. base in Afghanistan in 2002, when he agreed to turn informant.

Terek Dergoul, held at the same base, said: 'One of the guards was saying, "We've got another 007".'

The language here is particularly interesting: the reference to Informant A as "another 007" and the suggestions that Mohamed should "work with the British Government." If Binyam Mohamed had agreed to spy for the Brits, would he have avoided all that horrible torture he suffered?

The possibility that these "recidivists" are actually our recruits spying on Islamic extremists for the Americans might explain a few details about the report. For example, the report only lists 29 of the 74 purported "recidivists" by name. It doesn't mention the others "because of national security and intelligence-gathering concerns." Sure, that might reflect a desire not to alert militants to our intelligence channels. It might also reflect a desire to protect our spies in the field.

And the possibility that at least some of these "recidivists" are now our spies might explain the hold-up on the release of the document.

This points out an important reason for torture: to turn captives into OUR terrorists!

Of course the Wheeler and the liberals at that blog never seem to make the obvious connection that 9/11 was (at minimum) done by "our" terrorists. I still can't figure whether most of these people are intel plants are just maddeningly dumb.

But in any case, here are the four main reasons I can figure for capturing foreigners and then torturing them:

1) to obtain false confessions to support whatever official story has been decided upon

2) to brainwash innocents into becoming terrorist-agents for us

3) to brainwash our terrorists to cover up what they have done for us

4) to anger captives into eventually taking up arms against the US (much like what happens when we bomb civilians-- innocents are angered into taking arms against the US)