Are you speaking to me? All youve done here is state your opinion.
Printable View
Are you speaking to me? All youve done here is state your opinion.
Thats because I have no proof that the US is actively torturing people and at no point have I said otherwise. I would like not to have to even consider the possibility. I believe, however, that the very existence of Gitmo and its ilk is a problem that has to be addressed if we are ever to be the good guys (maybe even the just the winners) in the so called war on terror. That has been my opinion from the beginning, which is why I brought my original post to your attention.
And at no point have I accused YOU of it. But many here seem to think its a foregone conclusion.Quote:
Thats because I have no proof that the US is actively torturing people and at no point have I said otherwise.
We agree again.Quote:
would like not to have to even consider the possibility..
I agree in spirit. However I put the saftey of the US above the so called rights of terrorists and unlawful combatants.Quote:
I believe, however, that the very existence of Gitmo and its ilk is a problem that has to be addressed if we are ever to be the good guys (maybe even the just the winners) in the so called war on terror. That has been my opinion from the beginning, which is why I brought my original post to your attention.
I don't care much for the rights of terrorists myself. I don't care much for paedophiles either but certainly wouldn't lynch anyone merely suspected of it. The extra-judicial nature of Gitmo pisses all over the sense of justice of which the West should be rightfully proud. How can we know that they are terrorists if there has not been due process? More importantly, will this establishment ever be shut down? The term unlawful combatants is also one with which I am uncomfortable. The war in Afghanstan, for example, is over (apparently). Either send them back or prosecute them as criminals. The same goes for suspected terrorists.
Mere specualtion on your part.Quote:
The extra-judicial nature of Gitmo pisses all over the sense of justice of which the West should be rightfully proud
There was under the articles of the Geneva convention. Would you give them access to US courts?Quote:
How can we know that they are terrorists if there has not been due process?
Again thats how the Geneva Convention classifies them. Once more these rules are made to discourage people from fighting in such a manner. If we all listen to people like Tribesman they would be treated the same as US soldiers. This is ludicrous and makes the conventions worthless. If your not going to be punished for not following the rules why follow them at all?Quote:
The term unlawful combatants is also one with which I am uncomfortable.
Eh, granted. My bad, should've read it more carefully. Okay, lessee now...Quote:
Can you say pwnd?
...and...Quote:
Martin Mubanga, another of the four British detainees transferred to UK custody and released a little over 24 hours later has alleged that in June 2004 he was subjected to the following treatment while shackled and lying on the floor of an interrogation room in Guantánamo:
"I needed the toilet and I asked the interrogator to let me go. But he just said ‘you’ll go when I say so’. I told him he had five minutes to get me to the toilet or I was going to go on the floor. He left the room. Finally, I squirmed across the floor and did it in the corner, trying to minimize the mess. I suppose he was watching through a one-way mirror or the CCTV camera. He comes back with a mop and dips it in the pool of urine. Then he starts covering me with my own waste, like he’s using a big paint-brush, working methodically, beginning with my feet and ankles, and working his way up my legs. All the while, he’s racially abusing me, cussing me: ‘Oh, the poor little negro, the poor little nigger.’ He seemed to think it was funny".(313)
Martin Mubanga, arrested in Zambia, transferred to Guantánamo in May 2002, and affirmed as an "enemy combatant" by the CSRT in October 2004, also described the use of temperature manipulation during interrogations, as well as isolation, withdrawal of "comfort items", beatings and other physical abuse at the detention facility.
Since the Rasul decision in June 2004, some Guantánamo detainees have been visited by lawyers representing them for their habeas corpus appeals in US courts. Some of what the detainees have said has been declassified in recent weeks, providing the first chance for their accounts of what they have been through to be made public. Unclassified details of the alleged treatment of Bahraini detainee Jum’ah Mohammad Abdul Latif Al Dossari and others are given below, as provided to Amnesty International by the lawyers for the detainees:
"Mr Al Dossari was arrested in Pakistan and held by Pakistani authorities for several weeks. Mr Al Dossari was transferred from Pakistan to Kandahar, Afghanistan via airplane by US authorities. On the plane, he was shackled by chains on his thighs, waist and shoulders, with his hands tied behind him. The chains were so tight around his shoulders that he was forced to lean forward at an extreme angle during the entire flight. This caused great pain to Mr Al Dossari’s stomach, where he had had an operation some years before. When Mr Al Dossari complained about the pain, he was hit and kicked in the stomach, causing him to vomit blood.
Upon arriving in Kandahar, Mr Al Dossari and other detainees were put on a row on the ground in a tent. US Marines urinated on the detainees and put cigarettes out on them (Mr Al Dossari has scars that are consistent with those that would be caused by cigarette burns). A US soldier pushed Mr Al Dossari’s head into the ground violently and other soldiers walked on him…"
Mohammad Al Dossari has alleged, among other things, that he was forced to walk barefoot over barbed wire and that his head was pushed to the ground on broken glass. He has alleged that US soldiers subjected him to electric shocks, death threats, assault and humiliation. He has alleged that in Guantánamo Bay, he was subjected to a violent cell extraction, possibly on 27 or 28 April 2002, in which his head was repeatedly struck against the floor by a military guard until he lost consciousness. The government of Bahrain is reported to have requested an investigation into this incident. Mohammaded Al Dossari has alleged that during interrogations he has been wrapped in Israeli and US flags, shackled to the floor ("short-shackled") for some 16 hours, and been threatened that his family in Bahrain would be killed.
Fellow Bahraini detainee Abdullah Al Noaimi has alleged that he was physically assaulted by US soldiers in Kandahar air base in Afghanistan, stripped and sexually humiliated. He says that he witnessed detainees being bitten by dogs in Kandahar. In Guantánamo, he alleged that he has been threatened with rape, injected with an unknown substance during an interrogation, subjected to sexual taunting by female personnel, and hours of being shackled in a room made freezing by air conditioning.
A number of Yemeni detainees have alleged that they and others were subjected to torture and ill-treatment in Afghanistan before their transfer to Guantánamo, where they describe the regime as abusive, punitive, slow or failing to treat medical and dental problems, and prone to violent cell extractions and religious intolerance. The latter has allegedly included repeated disrespect for the Koran, including taking detainees’ copies, insulting them, wrapping them in the Israeli flag, throwing them on the ground, and stamping on them.
Ø Mohammed Mohammed Hassen has alleged that an interrogator made him run 20 laps when he refused to talk, wounding his feet as he was still shackled. After further questioning, he alleges that he was made to run again, and subsequently put in isolation for 40 days.
Ø Several allege that interrogators have used the air conditioning to make detainees freezing cold. Yasin Qasem Muhammad Ismail says that he has been kept under the air conditioner running full blast for 18 hours. He has alleged that when held in Bagram air base in Afghanistan, US soldiers beat him, kicked him, and stood on his back and knees.
Ø Abd Al Malik Abd Al Wahab alleges that he has been forced to endure many hours of cold under air conditioners, and subjected to sleep deprivation. He states that he was threatened that unless he confessed he would be taken "underground" and would never see daylight. He has said that he had his thumb broken during beatings by US soldiers in the US air base in Kandahar in Afghanistan.
Turkish national and German resident Murat Kurnaz has alleged that when he was held in the US air base in Kandahar, interrogators repeatedly forced his head into a bucket of cold water for long periods of time, as well as subjecting him to an electric shock on his feet. He has alleged that he was held for days shackled and handcuffed with his arms secured above his head. On one occasion, he claims that a military officer loaded his gun and pointed it at Murat Kurnaz’s head, screaming at him to admit to being an al-Qa’ida associate. Murat Kurnaz also claims to have witnessed other detainee beatings, in one case that he believes may have resulted in the detainee’s death. In Guantánamo, he alleges, he has been subjected to sexual humiliation and taunting by young women who entered the interrogation room where he was shackled to the floor. When of them began to caress him from behind, he jerked his head back, hitting her head. He alleges that a response team of guards in riot gear entered the room beat him and sprayed him with pepper spray, and he was taken to isolation where he was left on the floor with his hands tied behind his back for 20 hours.
The handwritten notes of a US lawyer who met with Kuwaiti detainees in Guantánamo in January 2005 make for similarly disturbing reading:
All indicated that they had been horribly treated, particularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan where they were first held for many months after being taken into custody (in Kandahar, Kohat, Bagram). Although the words they used were different, the stories they told were remarkably similar – terrible beatings, hung from wrists and beaten, removal of clothes, hooding, exposure naked to extreme cold, naked in front of female guards, sexual taunting by both male and female guards/interrogators, some sexual abuse (rectal intrusion), terrible uncomfortable positions for hours. All confirmed that all this treatment was by Americans…
Several said pictures were taken of some of this abuse...Some of the pictures still exist and are still used by the interrogators. Many knew that the Americans had killed several people during the interrogations at these places.
Several also mentioned the use of electric shocks – like ping pong paddles put under arms – some had this done; many saw it done.
Several said they just could not believe Americans could act this way.
Tied so tightly that hands and feet swelled to much above normal size. Forced to move and assume uncomfortable positions while tied this way. Beaten with chains when would go to the bathroom. Forced to stay in positions and to urinate and defecate on self.
Were not as specific about the abuses at Guantanamo. Several indicated that the physical abuses continued at GTMO, many confirmed the use of stress positions. But most said the abuse was more subtle (that also included beatings, though, but usually types of tactics ‘that would not leave marks’). All seemed more concerned by religious persecution than physical abuse. From the outset, mocked for their religion...
...and let me tell you, there's a whole lot more where that came from. And that's just Amnesty International. I haven't even checked out the other human-rights organizations yet.Quote:
However, it seems that any such representations were unheeded by the USA. Indeed, when the "UK Government officially asked the US authorities in May 2004 if interrogation techniques such as hooding, sleep and food deprivation had been used in Guantánamo Bay and Iraq", the US administration was unapologetic in its response, confirming "that such techniques had been authorised for a limited period – in Guantanamo Bay between November 2002 and January 2003, and in Iraq until May 2004."(326) According to the evidence still being revealed, torture and ill-treatment has been more widespread than that message would suggest.
Concerns about abusive interrogation techniques from within the USA’s own agencies appear to have been ignored. In the wake of the Abu Ghraib scandal, and the emergence of the US administration’s memorandums on how US agents could avoid criminal liability for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, concerns within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) about techniques employed by US interrogators have come to light.(327)
FBI documents are among heavily redacted information reluctantly released by the administration pursuant to a request filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and others in October 2003 under the Freedom of Information Act, and a follow-up lawsuit filed in June 2004 demanding government compliance with this request. An FBI email dated 13 May 2004, for example, suggested that Major General Geoffrey Miller, who was commander of Guantánamo detentions from November 2002 to March 2004 before being made Deputy Commander for Detainee Operations in Iraq, had in Iraq "continued to support interrogation strategies we not only advised against, but questioned in terms of effectiveness… [T]he battles fought in [Guantánamo] while [General Miller] was there are on the record."(328)
An FBI email dated 22 May 2004 refers to an instruction to FBI personnel in Iraq "not to participate in interrogations by military personnel which might include techniques authorized by Executive Order but beyond the bounds of standard FBI practice". The email said that some of FBI personnel, although not themselves participating in abuse, had been "in the general vicinity of interrogations in which such tactics were being used". The email goes on to seek clarification of an instruction from the Office of General Counsel (OGC) requiring FBI personnel to report any abuse that he or she comes across:
"This instruction begs the question of what constitutes ‘abuse’. We assume this does not include lawful interrogation techniques authorized by Executive Order. We are aware that prior to a revision in policy last week, an Executive Order signed by President Bush authorized the following interrogation techniques among others: sleep ‘management’, use of MWDs (military working dogs), ‘stress positions’ such as half squats, ‘environmental manipulation’ such as use of loud music, sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc. We assume the OGC instruction does not include the reporting of these authorized interrogation techniques, and that the use of these techniques does not constitute ‘abuse’."
An FBI document from December 2004, originally classified as secret for 25 years, included the following prior observations by FBI agents:
Iraq
A detainee hooded and draped in a shower curtain, was cuffed to a waist high rail. An MP [military policeman] was apparently subjecting the detainee to sleep deprivation, as he was observed slapping the detainee lightly, as if to keep him from falling asleep;
Guantanamo Bay
A detainee’s mouth was duct taped for chanting from the Koran…military employee who applied the duct tape found it amusing;
A detainee being isolated for substantial periods of time;
Agents heard of detainees being subjected to considerable pain and very aggressive techniques during interrogations;
Agents aware of detainees being threatened…by dogs;
Agents have seen documentary evidence that a detainee was told that his family had been taken into custody and would be moved to Morocco for interrogation if he did not begin to talk.
Afghanistan
Agents are aware of detainees being subjected to interrogation techniques that would not be permitted in the United States (i.e. stress positions for extended periods of time and sleep deprivation) and to psychological techniques (i.e., loud music).
An FBI memorandum dated 14 July 2004 stated the following about the treatment of a Guantánamo detainee:
"In September or October of 2002 FBI agents observed that a canine was used in an aggressive manner to intimidate detainee #63 and, in November 2002, FBI agents observed Detainee #63 after he had been subject to intense isolation for over three months. During that time period, #63 was totally isolated (with the exception of occasional interrogations) in a cell that was always flooded with light. By late November, the detainee was evidencing behavior consistent with extreme psychological trauma."(329)
Another undated FBI email described the following which allegedly occurred in February 2004 against a detainee in Guantánamo:
"[H]e was yelled at for 25 minutes. [He] was short-shackled, the room temperature was significantly lowered, strobe lights were used, and possibly loud music. There were two male interrogators, one stood behind him and the other in front. They yelled at him and told him he was never leaving here… After the initial 25 minutes of yelling, [he] was left alone in the room in this condition for approximately 12 hours… During the 12 hours, [he] was not permitted to eat, pray or use the bathroom."
An FBI email from December 2003 referred to "torture techniques" being used by the Department of Defense (DoD) in Guantánamo, and noted the FBI’s Military Liaison and Detainee Unit’s "long standing and documented position against use of some of DoD’s interrogation practices". The email expressed concern that DoD interrogators were impersonating FBI agents, and that "if this detainee is ever released or his story made public in any way, DoD interrogators will not be held accountable because these torture techniques were done [by] the ‘FBI’ interrogators". The email noted that "these tactics have produced no intelligence of a threat neutralization nature to date and…have destroyed any chance of prosecuting this detainee".(330)
An FBI memorandum dated 10 May 2004 notes that law enforcement agencies at Guantánamo Bay "were of the opinion [that] results obtained from these interrogations were suspect at best". This memorandum recalls that the FBI had advised its agents who went to Guantánamo to "stay in line with Bureau policy and not deviate from that (as well as made them aware of some of the issues regarding DoD techniques"). The memorandum noted that the FBI and the Guantánamo military authorities had agreed to differ, and that "the Bureau has their way of doing business and DoD has their marching orders from the Sec Def [Secretary of Defense]". (331)
In any case it ought to be fairly obvious there's a bad smell coming from somewhere. Satisfied ? Consider yourself honored, Gaw; I don't usually get irritated enough to start looking for and quoting online sources.
So innocent until proven guilty according to the law is something that should be discarded when it is deemed expedient to do so? Free, open and public trials, the use of juries and access to legal representation are mere frippery? Oh dear.
It was my belief that not all of the inmates at Gitmo are in fact "unlawful combatants" picked up in various warzones. I thought some were handed over by other countries and have as such been denied their full rights under US law while also not being covered by the Geneva Convention. I may be wrong of course.
For US citizens no. For enemy combatants yes.Quote:
So innocent until proven guilty according to the law is something that should be discarded when it is deemed expedient to do so? Free, open and public trials, the use of juries and access to legal representation are mere frippery? Oh dear.
Watchman mostly all youve listed is allegations and most of them by the detainees themselves. The next part of your post indicates that the US indeed is looking into these allegations. There is no doubt that some prisoners have been abused. But when proof of this is shown those responsible are punished. Try that In Cuba. There they probably get rewarded for coming up with better means of torture.
[QUOTE=Gawain of Orkeny]For US citizens no. For enemy combatants yes./QUOTE]
Silly me.
Yeah, except for example those by the detainees' lawyers, or those by the FBI...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
I'd suggest you take a look at the admittedly imposingly large document quoted. It has easily enough on the legal and political side of things too to make one seriously doubt the Adminstration's sincerity in the issue...
Anyway, I take it you're satisfied on the "exactly what torture is he in favor of" side of things ?
Oh the lawyes of the accused. Surely they have no axe to grind. As to the FBI that just proves we dont just accept such things. Again most of the stuff listed there was less torture than I recieved in bootcamp.Quote:
Yeah, except for example those by the detainees' lawyers
Blanket denials again. As for the FBI, just look up the two last paragraphs from the second quote... you could say that they have an axe to grind too. The CIA, incidentally, denied everything as is customary, if I recall parts of the document correctly. And the Dept. of Defense is the one that gave the instructions to utilize dubious means to begin with...
As said, go look the thing up yourself. It was way too large, heavy and detailed to be copy-paste-quoted in anything but the most cursory manner, and I was mostly concentrating on the "what kind of torture" side of things.
Like Hell you did. Doesn't mean anything, anyway - there's no "torture lite", the same way as there's no "rape lite". Both are offenses heinous enough that to question the degree of it is quite absurd.Quote:
Again most of the stuff listed there was less torture than I recieved in bootcamp.
Is that so. Let me tell you a few things that happened to me in bootcamp and others. How about once a DI though I was talikng to another recuit. He jumped up on a table and told me to stand at attention in front of him. He them proceeded to take his M-14 and give a horizontal butt stroke. It threw me clear across the room and into a wall. A typical punishment for us all was to go outside in 90 degree weather with two mop buckets. We would fill these with sand and then be forced to hold them out at arms length for long periods of time. How about doing 1000 jumping jacks at a time is that torture? Another time they took the whole platoon into the showers. Aroom about 20 by 20 with 80 men in it. They closed all the windows , turned on the hot watr on all the shower heads and proceeded to make us all do squat thrusts. People were getting kicked in the face and bleeding. Meanwhile the DIs were throwing buckets of ammonia into the shower. Or how about the guy who forgot to put a stop on his bolt when we were all in a circle sighting in our weapons. They took this poor slob and had him stick his index fingers in the breaches of two M-14s and then made him do jumping jacks untill they fell of his fingers . As to not being allowed to go to the bathroom .It took me two weeks and a visit to the hospital before I took my first dump in bootcamp. I wasnt the only one. You never had the time. I remenr one guy asking during indoor PT for permission to go to the head. It was denied and the guy had to puke. He did so and the DIs were all over him. They said what the hell do you think youve got a T shirt for. Next time puke down your shirt and dont mess up the squad bay .In fact everyday there was torture for me. I cold go on but I hevent got the time or inclination to continue. So was I tortured or not?Quote:
Like Hell you did.
We have to agree that torture is not unique to a religion, system, nation or whatever.. Look at that, I'm disgusted...Quote:
...Turkish national and German resident Murat Kurnaz has alleged that when he was held in the US air base in Kandahar, interrogators repeatedly forced his head into a bucket of cold water for long periods of time, as well as subjecting him to an electric shock on his feet. He has alleged that he was held for days shackled and handcuffed with his arms secured above his head. On one occasion, he claims that a military officer loaded his gun and pointed it at Murat Kurnaz’s head, screaming at him to admit to being an al-Qa’ida associate. Murat Kurnaz also claims to have witnessed other detainee beatings, in one case that he believes may have resulted in the detainee’s death. In Guantánamo, he alleges, he has been subjected to sexual humiliation and taunting by young women who entered the interrogation room where he was shackled to the floor. When of them began to caress him from behind, he jerked his head back, hitting her head. He alleges that a response team of guards in riot gear entered the room beat him and sprayed him with pepper spray, and he was taken to isolation where he was left on the floor with his hands tied behind his back for 20 hours...
P.S. Guantanamo Nights Express would sound good for a movie title..
Well, that certainly amounts to gross bullying at the very least. Nice army you have there. Out of curiosity, did you go in there by your own decision ?
Again allegation only without proof. Nevermind that the AQ handbook tells them all to say they were tortured Now you would give them more ammunition to use against us.
Yeah, so ? They're not the ones responsible for creating an atmosphere where there is very real reason to take such allegation seriously - that's all Made In USA, thank you very much.
Comparing the US favourably to Cuba? "D'oh!" springs to mind; stating that the US is less repressive than Cuba is almost totally irrelevant, since higher humanitarian standards are (and should be) expected from the upholder of democracy.
Isn't there a lack of a search function for backroom topics, where such a statement may have been posted?Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
More accurately, scapegoats are made of those lowest level soldiers responsible for getting caught, while those who developed the system are promoted and rewarded. The highest up in this administration are experts at avoiding accountability.Quote:
There is no doubt that some prisoners have been abused. But when proof of this is shown those responsible are punished.
ichi:bow:
Yes there is. I did mention it. JAG has been absent recently I believe. Probably busy smoking huge cigars while driving a classic cadillac through the streets of Havana.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
About what I was thinking...Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
China has been a far worse human rights offender than Cuba for years, but that hasn't stopped the U.S. from falling all over itself trying to do business with China's huge potential market. I'm not saying my own country is not guilty of the same thing, but at least we aren't trying to tell people not to do business with Cuba on humanitarian grounds, then ignoring the same principle elsewhere just because there is a bigger profit in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanamori
What the hell is the point of this thread?
Yes Gawain, Cuba is a worse human rights violator than the U.S.
Happy?
Again allegation only without proof. Nevermind that the AQ handbook tells them all to say they were tortured
~D ~D ~D Still the same old rubbish Gawain after all this time , now could you please tell us , was this the Al-Qaida handbook that is written by an Ex-US special forces NCO or the Al-Qaida handbook that was bought from a Californian Survivalist/militia bookstore ?
So by that statement the US marines have an axe to grind with the USA government with regards to the trials then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Erm...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Aren't most of the Gitmo detainees being held on "allegation only without proof?"
You don't seem to be such a stickler about proof when it comes to them, now, do you?
So innocent until proven guilty according to the law is something that should be discarded when it is deemed expedient to do so? Free, open and public trials, the use of juries and access to legal representation are mere frippery? Oh dear.
Interesting concept of Justice. Reverse the situation... would you like it if US citizens got treated like the people in Gitmo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Do you think it would be okay if a relative had no access to public trial, juries. That they were considered guilty first and had to prove their innocence?
Again their being held according to the rules of the Geneva convention. Why dont you all join the international red cross and push for equal rights for everyone then no matter how horrible they are? Again these rules are made to discourage people from fighting in such a manner. Your position makes the Geneva Convention a mockery. If they know we have certain rules they can use against us rest assured they will. You all act like we just went around picking up people at random and sending them off to Gitmo. This is not the case. These are the worst of the worst. Many after being released have been found fighting us in other places and aprehended again. What good will all your sanctomnious posturing get you when the blow you up?Quote:
Interesting concept of Justice. Reverse the situation... would you like it if US citizens got treated like the people in Gitmo.
Do you think it would be okay if a relative had no access to public trial, juries. That they were considered guilty first and had to prove their innocence?
Let me put it this way. The Marines were and usually are an all volunteer service. It was so when I joined in 68. Of course it was a nice safe time to join however.Quote:
Out of curiosity, did you go in there by your own decision ?
You do realise that marine lawyers are not happy with the way things are being handled in Gitmo either...
[QUOTE=Slyspy]Equality and freedom for all of us, and to hell with the rest?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
My God, we've got so much evidence by now that the US has been torturing people that the mind reels. Gawain's right about one thing though: that the US military was teaching and using torture for many years before Gitmo. They were even teaching torture techniques to South American military officers at the "School of the Americas" during the 1980s and early 1990s. The DoD admitted it in 1996 LINK.
Gawain, you seem to indicate that testimony of torture from prisoners and their lawyers can't be considered evidence because they have some sort of self-interest... but how can you take official denials any more seriously? Certainly, the military and the government have as much self-interest in denying abuse as any prisoner would have in laying the charges. Besides, we're constantly catching the military in that kind of lie. They do it as a matter of course. Just think of the white phosphorus denials that the government had to retract a few days ago.
Anyway, here's a link to an interview with a US Army interrogator in Iraq who talks about some of the abuses that he witnessed and participated in during his time in Iraq. He mentions inducing hypothermia, using dogs, etc... and how frequently they were pulling innocent people off the street to make it look like they were capturing lots of terrorists. He points out what every professional interrogator knows: that you don't get good intel through torture... you get it by establishing a connection with the captive and making nice.
Just this morning there was an FBI counter-terrorism interrogator on the Today Show talking about this issue saying that you don't want to torture people because they'll give you false information to make you stop. You want to turn them by getting to know them... befriending them... so that you can go back and use them as a continuing source of information.
For US citizens no. For enemy combatants yes.
How about Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi? They were American citizens, yet into the gulag they went. They released Hamdi last year so that they wouldn't have to test the issue in court, and Padilla is still languishing in some secret prison somewhere. Essentially, they want to be able to call US citizens "enemy combatants" and hold them forever, too.
However I put the saftey of the US above the so called rights of terrorists and unlawful combatants.
You're making the argument that all tyrannies make: that national security trumps the rule of law. That's extremely un-American.
Without the rule of law, you have to trust the executive whenever they accuse somebody. That's a rejection of the entire intellectual framework behind our system. We don't just trust King Bush, or whomever, to make the call as to who should be locked up without trial or representation for the rest of their lives. Our system assumes that power is corrupting and needs to be checked and balanced.
If the Bushies can't make a reasonable case to hold somebody through our legal system I see no reason to assume that the person should be held. We know that a huge number of detainees are locked up on flimsy evidence, or no evidence. That story the other day about the two Afghan poets who were sold to the Americans and interrogated for years because they wrote an anti-Clinton satire indicates that somebody needs to be overseeing these cases.