Well then here you go, a source that refutes the Murdoch news outlet claim that "The Memos prove we didn't torture":
WASHINGTON The Justice Department on Thursday made public detailed memos describing brutal interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency, as President Obama sought to reassure the agency that the C.I.A. operatives involved would not be prosecuted.
In dozens of pages of dispassionate legal prose, the methods approved by the Bush administration for extracting information from senior operatives of Al Qaeda are spelled out in careful detail like keeping detainees awake for up to 11 straight days, placing them in a dark, cramped box or putting insects into the box to exploit their fears.
The interrogation methods were authorized beginning in 2002, and some were used as late as 2005 in the C.I.A.s secret overseas prisons. The techniques were among the Bush administrations most closely guarded secrets, and the documents released Thursday afternoon were the most comprehensive public accounting to date of the program.
Some senior Obama administration officials, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., have labeled one of the 14 approved techniques, waterboarding, illegal torture. The United States prosecuted some Japanese interrogators at war crimes trials after World War II for waterboarding and other methods detailed in the memos.
...
Together, the four memos give an extraordinarily detailed account of the C.I.A.s methods and the Justice Departments long struggle, in the face of graphic descriptions of brutal tactics, to square them with international and domestic law. Passages describing forced nudity, the slamming of detainees into walls, prolonged sleep deprivation and the dousing of detainees with water as cold as 41 degrees alternate with elaborate legal arguments concerning the international Convention Against Torture.
The four legal opinions, released in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the A.C.L.U., were written in 2002 and 2005 by the Justice Departments Office of Legal Counsel, the highest authority in interpreting the law in the executive branch.
...
The memos include what in effect are lengthy excerpts from the agencys interrogation manual, laying out with precision how each method was to be used. Waterboarding, for example, involved strapping a prisoner to a gurney inclined at an angle of 10 to 15 degrees and pouring water over a cloth covering his nose and mouth from a height of approximately 6 to 18 inches for no more than 40 seconds at a time.
But a footnote to a 2005 memo made it clear that the rules were not always followed. Waterboarding was used with far greater frequency than initially indicated and with large volumes of water rather than the small quantities in the rules, one memo says, citing a 2004 report by the C.I.A.s inspector general.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/us/politics/17detain.html?hp
The memos sure "prove" that there was no torture as the Murdoch Street Journal asserts.
The fact that we prosecuted Japanese for torture for doing the same damn thing must just be a "historical anamoly" in thier eyes.
Did you study the NYTimes article listing exactly how the methods had to be employed?
And do you know tht AG has a history of sending back reports that don't contain the results he wishes?
And did you read the article by Mark Thiessen explaining how releasing these memos obviates any interrogation?
In short, the jihadists allow one to talk if he has reached his psychological limit. The methods are designed to make them think they have reached this limit. For example, a wall was constructed to make a loud noise when he is pushed into it. Thus the force seems greater than it is . This is to limit the physical aspects of the method. A collar was worn to prevent whip lash.
Some torture.
So you'd be fine with all this being done to captured US soldiers or agents?
He'll reply, "oh you don't think it is being done", but he won't answer whether or not he approves of this being done to them.
And he won't admit that us doing this increases the likelyhood that it will happen to our soldiers when they are caught.
And no, most US soldiers captured are probably not tortured, because the country who captured them don't want us paying them back with bombs.
Was Jill Carroll tortured? Jill Carroll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I don't think she was.