ISIS waterboarded Foley, other hostages
WASHINGTON — At least four hostages held in Syria by the Islamic State terrorist group, including an American journalist who was recently beheaded, were waterboarded in the early part of their captivity, according to people familiar with the treatment of the kidnapped Westerners.
James Foley was among the four who were waterboarded several times by the terrorists, who appeared to retaliate for the CIA's use of the technique to interrogate terrorists after 9/11.
Waterboarding subjects are often strapped down while cold water is poured over a cloth covering their faces; they have the sensation of drowning. “The wet cloth creates a barrier through which it is difficult — or in some cases not possible — to breathe,” according to a May 2005 Justice Department memo on the CIA's use of the technique.
ISIS “is a group that routinely crucifies and beheads people,” a U.S. official said. “To suggest that there is any correlation between (ISIS)'s brutality and past U.S. actions is ridiculous and feeds into their twisted propaganda.”
President Obama has condemned waterboarding as torture.
The terrorists “knew exactly how it was done,” said a person with direct knowledge of what happened to the hostages. The person, who would only discuss the hostages' experience on condition of anonymity.
Meanwhile, ISIS posted pictures of executing more than 160 Syrian government troops seized in recent fighting near the Tabqa airfield. The Syrian soldiers were forced to strip, marched in their underwear in the arid Syrian countryside and executed by firing squads.
In southern Syria, gunmen detained 43 U.N. peacekeepers during fighting on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, the United Nations said. Eighty-one peacekeepers were trapped in the area by heavy clashes between rebels and Syrian troops.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.