[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
War, War, War See other War, War, War Articles Title: Many Approved Torture Eagle Editorial 09/10/08 "The Wichita Eagle" -- When it comes to the Bush administration's disgraceful decision to torture terrorism suspects, there are plenty of officials to share the shame. New documents provided to Congress confirm that Condoleezza Rice, then national security adviser, led meetings in 2002 in which officials discussed specific "enhanced" interrogation methods. Those attending reportedly included Vice President Dick Cheney, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and then-CIA Director George Tenet. What's particularly noteworthy about these meetings is that they occurred, and the torturing of detainees began, months before the administration had a legal opinion saying that it was OK to torture -- as shoddy as that opinion was. Torture and degrading treatment are clearly prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and by U.S. law. In addition, the 1984 Convention Against Torture specifically states there are "no circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency," that could be "invoked as a justification of torture" or "other acts of cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment." To try to circumvent these clear prohibitions, and provide cover for the torturing that had already been occurring, administration attorneys tried to redefine "torture" to be so severe and so prolonged ("lasting months or years") that it was nearly impossible to commit. It also claimed that the infliction of pain had to be the "precise objective" and not a byproduct of the abuse, according to Jane Mayer's authoritative book "The Dark Side." Thus, according to administration attorneys, an interrogator could know that torturing would cause pain, but if "causing such harm is not the objective, he lacks the requisite specific intent" to be guilty of torture. Harold Koh, dean of Yale Law School, described these claims as "perhaps the most clearly erroneous legal opinion I have ever read." In addition to violating the law -- and, according the Red Cross, possibly committing war crimes -- the United States gained little if any new quality intelligence by torturing, according to CIA and FBI officials. In fact, torturing detainees (including some who were innocent) hurt our ability to obtain good intelligence while undermining our ideals and damaging our reputation and credibility worldwide. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly said at one of those White House meetings that "history will not judge us kindly." Nor should the American public. For the editorial board, Phillip Brownlee Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||