The CIA took naked photographs of people it sent to its foreign partners for torture, the Guardian can reveal.

A former US official who had seen some of the photographs described them as “very gruesome”.

The naked imagery of CIA captives raises new questions about the seeming willingness of the US to use what one medical and human rights expert called “sexual humiliation” in its post-9/11 captivity of terrorism suspects. Some human rights campaigners described the act of naked photography on unwilling detainees as a potential war crime.

Continue reading:  CIA photographed detainees naked before sending them to be tortured

13 thoughts on “CIA photographed detainees naked before sending them to be tortured

  1. Bob, I don’t know if you read this article from Scientific American, and I know the information isn’t new to you, but it just goes to show you that this psychological strategy to exploit, humiliate, depersonalize, dehumanize, and marginalize, creates the very situations (i.e. extremism) that keep the military-industrial complex morbidly obese, and ensures job security for the CIA.

    It’s referred to as “co-radicalization”, and fear-mongering politicians (and the media) are in on it too.


    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks Victoria, the dynamics of radicalization detailed in that excellent article are exploitable by powerful and corrupt interests – to wit:

      Understanding Co-radicalization

      Although we may think of terrorists as sadists and psychopaths, social psychology suggests they are mostly ordinary people, driven by group dynamics to do harm for a cause they believe to be noble and just.

      Terrorism reconfigures these group dynamics so that extreme leadership seems more appealing to everyone. Just as ISIS feeds off immoderate politicians in the West, for example, so do those immoderate politicians feed off ISIS to draw support for themselves.

      Having others misperceive or deny a valued identity—an experience we describe as misrecognition—systematically provokes anger and cynicism toward authorities.

      While I appreciate how radicalization works, I’m more interested in why it works – specifically:

      As a fellow blogger of ours has explained – Emma, who focuses on psychology – the “ordinary people” who are prone to radicalization (sociopaths and psychopaths, in my view) stopped being clinically diagnosed as psychologically abnormal decades ago. This was done for two reasons: 1) many or most of these people can and do function normally in society, they hold jobs, have families, etc.; 2) over-diagnosis of psychological problems was at the time seen as persecuting the mentally ill.

      The exploitable cultural and political schisms in society are always present. What stimulates them out of latency are increases in social inequalities which pit one demographic group against another (i.e. group dynamics – e.g. ethnic/religious friction, class/regional conflict, etc.).

      What I’m saying here is that the factors which lead to radicalization are not the exception to society, but are inherent within it. When social organization fails to maintain a level of equality between groups, and when individuals afflicted with sociopathic/psychopathic personality disorders go clinically untreated, dangerous radicalization will permeate through society from top to bottom.

      I realize my view is rather profound and probably quite unpopular, but I’d like to hear your honest thoughts on the matter.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Bob, thanks so much for taking the time to read the article and share your thoughts. Your view is in line with mine. I have posted extensively on this subject. Right now I don’t have time to share my thoughts in detail — but I have made several posts on this subject.

        If you want some of the links, I’ll be happy to share. Is there an email I can contact you at? Or you can contact me. My email is listed in my gravatar.

        Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.