Month: July 2008

Psychologist Marty Seligman has objected to the notion that he "assisted" the torture program of the president in Gitmo and throughout the war on terror. Jane Mayer never actually used that word, others have in describing Mayer’s book. No facts in Mayer’s book have been disputed by Seligman. Here’s Jane’s response to his protestation of total innocence of what he became involved with, wittingly or unwittingly:

    Professor Seligman’s disavowal actually adds a rather interesting new fact to the story of how the psychology profession played a role in the CIA’s “special” interrogation program. In “The Dark Side,” I established by interviewing him, that he had personally spoken for three hours at the Navy’s SERE School in San Diego, in April of 2002, at a somewhat mysterious confab organized in part by the head of Behavioral Science at the CIA.

This was a pretty crucial moment in the development of America’s secret interrogation and detention program. Abu Zubayda had been captured just weeks before, and the CIA was trying to come up with ways to make him talk. They had no patience for the slow, rapport-building methods used by the FBI, whose role in the case they had just superceded. But what to do?     At this very moment, Professor Seligman, it seems, agreed to participate in what he says was an unexplained private high-level CIA meeting, held on the campus of the part of the Navy that runs a secret program emulating torture – the SERE School in San Diego. 

Professor Seligman says he has no idea why he was called in from his academic position in Pennsylvania, to suddenly appear at this CIA event. He just showed up and talked for three hours about how dogs, when exposed to horrible treatment, give up all hope, and become compliant. Why the CIA wanted to know about this at this point, he says he never asked.    But somehow- and this is what is news as far as I know – Professor Seligman does know that in his audience were the two psychologists who soon after became the key advisers to the CIA’s “enhanced” interrogation program: James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen.    So, Professor Seligman, must have had some contact with them, since he knew they were in his audience. Did he speak with them? What did they talk about?

According to sources close to the FBI, around the same time, one of those psychologists, James Mitchell, showed up where Abu Zubayda was being held, and started talking about Dr. Seligman’s theories of “Learned Helplessness” as shedding useful light on how to coerce Zubayda into talking. Specifically, he spoke of Seligman’s dog experiments, in which random electric shocks broke the dogs’ will to resist. An FBI agent was appalled – pointing out they were dealing with humans, not dogs. But Mitchell said it was “good science” for both.

(Mitchell declined to elaborate on the treatment of Abu Zubayda, when I interviewed him, but admitted he admired Seligman’s work on Learned Helplessness. A lawyer for Mitchell later claimed that he had not tried to apply the theory to detainees. But a colleague, Col. Steve Kleinman, who worked in the SERE program, said Mitchell talked all the time about how Learned Helplessness provided the blueprint for interrogating detainees).

So- did Seligman assist the U.S. Torture program? I am careful not to say so in “The Dark Side,”- I just recount the facts of his odd visit to the SERE school. So- he is not denying anything in my book.

But now that he brings all of this up again, it would be nice if he’d answer a few more questions. What exactly did he think he was doing that day in April of 2002 with the CIA? How did he know who Mitchell and Jessen were, and, what role did he think they were playing at that time? Maybe he was as clueless as he says he was. But, why doesn’t he then tell us know what he thinks of his theories being used in this way? Does he renounce Mitchell and Jessen? Does he think they used psychology immorally? He was the head of the APA- has he ever spoken out about this? Has he ever complained to the CIA about what they did with his science? Time for some more information here…instead of non-denial denials…

Ezra keeps the bike debate going:

…cycling in some countries is a demographically specific pursuit while in other countries, it’s a broadly used form of transportation favored by substantial chunks of both genders, all age groups, and all income levels. The overarching point is simply that, in societies where cycling infrastructure is intelligently planned, there’s nothing elitist, or liberal, or uncommon, about it… In America no one cycles, and when you’re over thirty, really no one cycles. In the Netherlands, a quarter of the old make their trips by bike. Which is just to say, everyone cycles. It’s like walking, or driving: A mode of transportation that’s often the best for a given trip. Not some sort of radical lifestyle statement.

Marc explains what that means.

RedState, bastion of independent thinking:

Anyone who reads RedState on a regular basis knows by now that the contributors who lend content to the site aren’t shills for Republicans in Congress.

And it’s that dogged independence that gives so much credibility to the conservative blogosphere — credibility that simply doesn’t exist on the left, where blogs like the Puffington Host [sic.] and Daily Kos serve as a bulletin board for standard Democratic talking points, and where opposing viewpoints are shouted down from view.

Could Huckabee as veep get it going?:

Evangelical Christians remain the organizing engine of the Republican Party, and they typically don’t get the credit they deserve for winning the race for Bush in 2004 (usually pundits like to frame the outcome as "John Kerry lost," despite unprecedented Democratic turnout). McCain’s current level of milquetoast support from that group is a major obstacle to him winning in an environment where Democrats are both more numerous and significantly harder in their support for Obama.

It’s awareness that these evangelicals are still the pumping heart of the Republican organizing infrastructure that motivates my belief McCain ought to seriously consider Mike Huckabee as his VP…Huckabee may have a few gaffes here and there, and he may be wildly out of the American mainstream for some of his views once those views reach sunlight, but I simply don’t think those views are going to capture enough voter attention nor be meaningfully damaging enough (as merely the VP) to outweigh the benefits Huckabee would bring the ticket. If McCain isn’t able to get any oxygen in the narrative (good or bad), how much scrutiny will his VP choice really get? Would a perceived base pander pick truly hurt McCain with the undecideds in a way that has any staying power?

I’m not usually speechless but I’m ecstatic to report that the Senate just passed PEPFAR without the Sessions amendment, and Senator Biden, who managed the bill, just said they will probably avoid a conference with the House and send the bill forthwith to the president’s desk. Barring some unforeseen event, the HIV Travel Ban – a relic of the days when HIV was a source of fear and stigma and terror – is finally over.

Obviously, the bigger achievement in PEPFAR is the funding for continued help for those with HIV and AIDS in the developing world – people whose plight is unimaginably worse than mine or so many others trapped by this HIV law. Bush’s legacy in this is one for which he is rightly proud. But for those of us who have long dreamed of becoming Americans, and have been prevented by 1993 law from even being able to enter or leave the US without waivers or fear or humiliation, this is a massive burden lifted.

I’m not exaggerating when I say that it’s one of the happiest days of my whole life. For two and a half decades, I have longed to be a citizen of the country I love and have made my home. I now can. There is no greater feeling.

Thanks go to many, many people, chiefly Senators Kerry and Smith, who made this a bipartisan priority. Gordon Smith proved how Republicans can reach out to those in genuine need, even if some are gay. All of us with HIV and with spouses or loved ones with the virus are in his debt. But also: Rob Epplin and Alex Nunez, Smith’s and Kerry’s amazing staffers, who made this possible. The Human Rights Campaign came through too, with insistent, diligent lobbying and a last-minute member email blitz. Immigration Equality, the group that does all the heavy lifting on LGBT and HIV immigration issues, were indispensable. Thanks, Rachel and Adam in particular. A word too to Senators Lugar and Biden, who shepherded the bill forward. I’m grateful too for those behind the scenes, Democrats and Republicans, who helped enormously: Carl Schmid and Jeff Trandahl, in particular. I will not forget Yuval Levin’s support. And a word to my friend, David Kuo, who helped me through some of the bleakest days I experienced because of this law. My closest friends know who they are and they know what they’ve done.

I’ve lived with this awful sense of insecurity, of fear of leaving the country, of visiting my family, of the lingering sense that my virus rendered me potentially deportable, that any roots I put down might be dug up suddenly one day – for fifteen years. The lifting of this threat – the sense that I now have a home I know will be secure for me and my husband – is indescribable.

And thank you, too, especially. Dish readers really helped – emailing your Senators and telling your stories. This blog can be really draining and a little exasperating. But the sense of support I’ve gotten these past few weeks has been amazing. It really is like family. And now you’ve made it possible to make an honest American out of me. Maybe you’ll regret it soon enough.

But you’re stuck with me now.

I’m gonna celebrate now, so no promises on the timing of my next post.

Marc writes:

On August 1, Matt Yglesias, our standard-setting Stalinist, is leaving The Atlantic for the Center for American Progress, where he’ll blog and help CAP cement its place in the Democratic intellectual firmament. Matt is more skeptical than almost anyone I know, so while the CAP folks may think they’re going to benefit from his prose, they’re going to find that their arguments are a lot sharper, and more intellectually honest.

I’m really, really sad to see Matt go. He wants to be more committed to the causes he believes in than an independent journalist can be, and so I respect his decision. But it was a joy to work alongside him and I’ll miss his quirky, funny, always razor-sharp take on the world.

Wilkinson tears into GNP:

I can hardly stand “what our team needs to do” sorts of books. Pretty much all democratic partisan politics is irredeemably nationalist, and I really get tired of largely morally bogus debates about whether caring for poor people means we need to bribe people to get married or to move more money from really rich Americans to relatively rich but not-so-rich-for-Americans Americans, or both. America is a big, exclusive, mostly involuntary club. If you want to fight over which club members ought to get what benefits and pay what dues, then fine. Do that. But none of this really has much to do with caring about “the working class,” most members of which speak strange tongues and are not considered clubbable. Speaking of Marxism 101.

I fear that many of the decent ideas in the book are undermined by a Rovian agenda to bribe a demographic to vote Republican.

The British Tory leader sees the great benefit of the Democratic nominee discussing fatherhood and responsibility. There’s a lot in common between Obama’s liberalism and Cameron’s conservatism – more than some Republicans might be willing to concede.

Obama releases a list of approved jokes. #5: "A Christian, a Jew and Barack Obama are in a rowboat in the middle of the ocean. Barack Obama says, ‘This joke isn’t going to work because there’s no Muslim in this boat.’"