The Washington Post reported that “current and former officials”      said the torture lasted weeks and even, according to some,      months, and that the techniques included hypothermia, long      periods of standing, sleep deprivation and multiple sessions of      waterboarding. All these “alternative procedures”, as Bush      described them, are illegal under US law and the Geneva      conventions. They are, in fact, war crimes. And they were once      all treated by the US as war crimes when they were perpetrated      by the Nazis. Waterboarding has been found to be a form of      torture in various American legal cases. 
    
     And that is where the story becomes interesting. The Bush      administration denies any illegality at all, insists it does not      “torture” but refuses to say whether it believes waterboarding      is torture or not. But hundreds of hours of videotape were      recorded of Zubaydah’s incarceration and torture. That evidence      would settle the dispute over the extremely serious question of      whether the president of the United States authorised war      crimes. 
    
     And now we have found out that all the tapes have been      destroyed...........
........     This is not, of course, the first big scandal to have emerged      over the administration’s interrogation policies. You can fill a      book with the sometimes sickening details that have come out of      Guantanamo Bay, Bagram in Afghanistan, Camp Cropper in Iraq and,      of course, Abu Ghraib. 
    
     The administration has admitted that several prisoners have been      killed in interrogation, and dozens more have died in the secret      network of interrogation sites the US has set up across the      world. The policy of rendition has sent countless suspects into      torture cells in Uzbekistan, Egypt, Jordan and elsewhere to feed      the West’s intelligence on jihadist terrorism. 
    
     But this case is more ominous for the administration because it      presents a core example of what seems to be a cover-up,      obstruction of justice and a direct connection between torture      and the president, the vice-president and their closest aides.     
    
     Because several courts had pending cases in which testimony from      Zubaydah’s interrogation was salient, the destruction of such      evidence triggers a legal process that is hard for the executive      branch to stymie or stall - and its first attempt was flatly      rebuffed by a judge last week. 
    
     Its key argument is a weakly technical one: that the      interrogation took place outside US territory - and therefore      the courts do not have jurisdiction over it. It’s the same      rationale for imprisoning hundreds of suspects at Guantanamo Bay      in Cuba - a legal no man’s land. But Congress can get involved -      especially if it believes that what we have here is a cover-up.     
    
     What are the odds that a legal effective interrogation of a key      Al-Qaeda operative would have led many highly respected      professionals in the US intelligence community to risk their      careers by leaking top-secret details to the press? 
    
     What are the odds that the CIA would have sought to destroy      tapes that could prove it had legally prevented serious and      dangerous attacks against innocent civilians? What are the odds      that a president who had never authorised waterboarding would be      unable to say whether such waterboarding was torture? 
    
     What are the odds that, under congressional grilling, the new      attorney-general would also refuse to say whether he believed      waterboarding was illegal, if there was any doubt that the      president had authorised it? The odds are beyond minimal. 
    
     Any reasonable person examining all the evidence we have -      without any bias - would conclude that the overwhelming      likelihood is that the president of the United States authorised      illegal torture of a prisoner and that the evidence of the crime      was subsequently illegally destroyed.
It is clear to me that most Americans simply don't care what the government does to these people, choosing to believe the propaganda that paints these people as somehow less human than us, less civilized, allowing them to achieve some sort of twisted justification in their  minds for allowing this to continue.  However, if basic humanity isn't enough to spur an outcry against this cruelty, perhaps self interest will be. The government has already begun to treat its "free citizens" savagely, and the brutality that is perpetrated in our names in the secret CIA prisons, Gitmo, Iraq, and Afghanistan has begun to travel home, and when it does, they will have perfected their techniques. Our society bears more resemblance to that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq ...the man that, of course, our CIA sponsored into power...than the free nation it claims to be.... It won't be long until Americans are waterboarded...in the name of "National Security"...and "for our own good", of course.
U.S. Constitution - R.I.P.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
The torture tape fingering Bush as a war criminal
Posted by
Melinda L. Secor
at
5:40 PM
 
Labels: "war on terror", abuse of power, brutality, gestapo tactics, Gitmo, Police State, Prisoner Abuse, torture
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment