You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Terror Networks
Using the 'T' word
2009-03-17
Many Americans have long suspected the Bush administration wasn't being completely truthful about the interrogation techniques used to extract information from terrorist suspects captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. Officials conceded some methods were "harsh," but they insisted no detainees were tortured or seriously mistreated.

Now a long-suppressed report by the International Committee of the Red Cross has surfaced to give the lie to those denials. The report's contents, presented to U.S. authorities in 2007 but made public only this week, describe in graphic detail officially sanctioned beatings, torture and abuse of prisoners in secret CIA prisons around the world that clearly violated U.S. and international law.

The ICRC investigators, who interviewed 14 "high value" detainees at Guantanamo in 2006, cited cases in which prisoners were soaked with water and forced to stand naked in icy cells for days at a time, or confined in coffin-like wooden boxes too small to stand up in.

Prisoners were deprived of sleep, food and medical care, punched, slapped or slammed into walls, and subjected to simulated drowning in a technique known as "waterboarding."

The ill-treatment to which [prisoners] were subjected while held in the CIA program, either singly or in combination, constituted torture," the ICRC stated flatly. Because the group is responsible for monitoring compliance with the Geneva Conventions, its findings, while confidential, have the force of law. Clearly, U.S. officials knew in 2007 that the outrages at Guantanamo constituted war crimes under international law.

Who is to be held accountable for these acts committed in the name of the American people? Notwithstanding former Vice President Dick Cheney's disgusting attempt over the weekend to paper over CIA misdeeds as vital to national security, denial is not an option.

President Barack Obama is understandably reluctant to launch a criminal investigation of the spy agency whose support he still badly needs, even after having repudiated the Bush administration's acquiescence in torture outlined in internal Justice Department memos released last week. But Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is vowing to get to the bottom of the matter in public hearings, and his inquiry need not turn into a partisan witch hunt if properly handled.

President Obama has said his administration won't countenance the torture of prisoners. But finding out exactly how the nation went so wrong over the last eight years is an essential first step toward ensuring it won't happen again.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#9   The problem is that lawyers are continuously trying to expand the definition of "torture".

How many frat boys died since 9/11 in 'initiations'? Yet it still goes on [regardless of the claims of the esteemed academics that they are suppressing the tradition].
Posted by: Procopius2k   2009-03-17 23:22  

#8  "T" = THEODORE? TEDDY [Bear]?

Gut Nuthin.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2009-03-17 19:55  

#7  
ICRC ought to stick to distributing care packages. Filed under the UN and other useless organizations who do useless and biased studies.

Posted by: JohnQC   2009-03-17 19:00  

#6  Ask John McCain, and his fellow inmates at the Hanoi Hilton and other North Vietnamese garden spots, what real torture is like. Ask Senator McCain to raise his hands above his head. Oh, yeah. He isn't able to, because of torture.
If he were still alive, you could ask Admiral James Stockdale, Medal of Honor recipient. He could barely walk or stand upright when he was released.
Those guys were tortured, along with many of the other POWs in VietNam and Korea. And they were true POWs under the Geneva Convention - captured in uniform while serving under the control of a controlling authority.
On the other hand, the "mistreatment" of the Gitmo Gang is like playschool. They get fed three religiously sensitive meals a day, along with exercise, prayer support, all kinds of goodies.
I have said before many times, that we should really enforce the Geneva Convention - if they are captured out of uniform, and not under the control of a national authority, they should be given a drumhead court martial. If found guilty, they should be shot. If we ask them a few forceful questions while waiting to execute them, so what. Only POWs are protected by only having to give their name, rank and serial number.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia   2009-03-17 17:28  

#5  The problem is that lawyers are continously trying to expand the definition of "torture". If you look at the way German prisoners were treated by the US and British Armies during WWII, you'll see the Al Qaeda prisoners are treated considerably better.

If you compare the way IRA prisoners were interogated by the British Army, Al Qaeda prisoners are treated no worse (and usually better) than IRA prisoners.

The leftists expand the word "torture" to mean anything from using an iron maiden to handling a Koran without gloves. Then they imply everyone
"tortured" was given an acid bath.

The more attention we pay to these idiots, the weaker we seem, and the dumber we seem.
Posted by: Frozen Al   2009-03-17 15:52  

#4  The fact that they're still breathing is proof positive that we didn't torture them enough. The fact that NONE of the Saudi royal family are imprisoned at Guantanamo is the major reason I can say we're not really committed to the "GWOT".
Posted by: Old Patriot   2009-03-17 14:33  

#3  ...and if ya can't trust Guantanamo detainees, who can you trust?
Posted by: tu3031   2009-03-17 13:40  

#2  Proof of this torture is that the prisoners said so, right? (Though I suspect it has at least some amount of truth to it, I still don't really care much, or think it should be hauled out in public.)
Posted by: Glenmore   2009-03-17 13:11  

#1  How many truck loads of salt is the ICRC worth?
Posted by: AlanC   2009-03-17 13:08  

00:00