This Is "Torture"?
According to a piece in England's Guardian, the interrogation techniques the CIA is seeking permission to use are the following:
[I]nduced hypothermia; forcing suspects to stand for prolonged periods; sleep deprivation; a technique called "the attention grab" where a suspect's shirt is forcefully seized; the "attention slap" or open hand slapping that hurts but does not lead to physical damage; the "belly slap"; and sound and light manipulation.
And there are Americans, like John McCain (who knows what real torture is), John Warner and Lindsay Graham who would rather put American lives at risk by being unable to extract useful information from terrorist suspects than see them subjected to "sleep deprivation" and similar uncomfortable, but hardly dangerous, discomforts.
Amazing.
[I]nduced hypothermia; forcing suspects to stand for prolonged periods; sleep deprivation; a technique called "the attention grab" where a suspect's shirt is forcefully seized; the "attention slap" or open hand slapping that hurts but does not lead to physical damage; the "belly slap"; and sound and light manipulation.
And there are Americans, like John McCain (who knows what real torture is), John Warner and Lindsay Graham who would rather put American lives at risk by being unable to extract useful information from terrorist suspects than see them subjected to "sleep deprivation" and similar uncomfortable, but hardly dangerous, discomforts.
Amazing.
posted by LadybugUSA at 7:25 PM
2 Comments:
eddy's last was a peach. Suppose your son or daughter, blah blah. Guess what, sparky? The people we fight do not abide any of our notions of civility. Sorry to break the news to you.
Bush's attempt to seek clarification is due to ambiguities in Geneva. In order to allow our people to do their jobs in the face of growing weeping and gnashing of teeth regarding the "inhumane" or "undignified" treatment of prisoners and to protect them from prosection whilst obtaining useful info from those who will no longer fear them thanks to people like eddy.
There is a dilemna born of this misplaced regard for those who wish us dead. We, of course, do not wish to lower ourselves to a point anywhere near those we have captured. But to outlaw anything that would cause a prisoner to reasonably fear for his well being is to render interrogations that much more difficult. Josh spoke of one fellow describing a building of rappot with a prisoner. It's not too detailed, but it would seem that by being the one guy that would NOT cause pain would be a good rapport builder. A "good cop" in effect. Could he have built that rapport without a fear already in place? This is an important question.
Josh also intimates that prisoners who were not terrorists suffered abuses. Well. It seems natural that such strict interrogation techniques WOULD NOT work on such a person since he knows nothing to begin with. The problem is not the technique here, but upon whom it was applied.
Josh also mentions "adequate heating and lighting..." Does it say anything about fluffy pillows and downy blankets? What you mentioned sounds like their normal accomodations, but not what would constitute true torture during interrogation. In other words, after interrogation, they'd be sent back to their Waldorf Astoria settings, where they'd enjoy the adequate heating and lighting.
Truth to tell, when I hear you guys complain about the methods used by our guys, I wonder if what we see on cop shows like "Homicide: Life In The Streets" or "NYPD Blue" during their interrogations would be allowed. Frankly, I don't much care about the dignity of someone involved with the people who hack off heads. And there's a lot of humiliation and indignity that I would have no problem visiting on one of these if the chance of preventing more head chopping or plane crashing or suicide murders can be accomplished. Come up with a better way that you can support as being workable with these types, and I'll gladly give a listen.
If the Geneva Conventions don't forbid Bush's harsh interrogation practices then why is he trying to push through a bill reinterpreting them?
Because Bush has elected not to tell SCOTUS, inre Hamdan, "you have ruled, now try to enforce it." Rather, he's trying to go along with it.
That's why.
As for information gathered from the likes of KSM, I would put forth that it has saved lives already.
Post a Comment
<< Home