Military coroners ruled that both the prisoners' deaths were homicide.
Homicide all right. Both were tortured to death. In a US-run facility in Afghanistan. By the US military personnel.
Mr. Dilawar had been chained by the wrists to the ceiling of his cell for four days without food or water. His legs had been repeatedly beaten by the US troops until he could neither stand nor bend and still he was denied the access to medical attention. By way of "interrogation" the US-style, besides beating him, the USAian interrogators stood on him, particularly concentrating on his groin.
What's worse, the USAian interrogators did so while not really even believing Mr. Dilawar was "guilty" of anything.
I guess they just felt the need to torture him to death simply because they knew they could, being the superior occupying force and all, and knew they could get away with it, as the White House had
shopped for a "favourable" legal view that said what the White House wanted to hear, that the US-held detainees of a "failed state" were not really POWs at all and therefore were not covered by the international conventions forbidding torture and inhuman treatment in the hands of the United States of America. As Lt. Gen. Daniel K. McNeill, US troop commander in Afghanistan, put it, "Our interrogation techniques are in accordance with what is generally accepted as interrogation techniques."
Ongoing investigations and prosecutions suggests that the Government does not approve the use of torture.
Ongoing investigations and prosecutions suggests that the Bush administration has taken a novel departure of internationally accepted human rights and has fostered a culture of torture and impunity.
As Major General Paul D. Eaton of the US Army testified, "
For our soldiers to hear their Vice President say on radio that a 'dunk in the water' is a 'no brainer' if it can save lives, is a threat to the good order and discipline of our Armed Forces. Water boarding is not safeguarding a prisoner, regardless of the conditions of their capture. To hear our CIA describe water boarding as a 'professional interrogation technique' is at once appalling and confusing to our men and women under arms.
"The good order and discipline of our Armed Forces begins with our Commander in Chief and must weave through the entire rank structure. The President must set the tone for our Youngest Private Soldier and the administration's policies today do not set the right tone."
Hmmmm! Makes you wonder. Then again, there is no allegation there that any incidents of torture were approved of or condoned by the US government.
Trying to poison the well again? Let me repeat, I'm afraid you have to do better than that. "Guardian is a leftist rag, therefore the united States of America does not torture" is a nonsense argument, as is "A United Nations official spoke with the condition of anonymity as is customary, therefore the United States of America cannot possibly practise torture."
There is no allegation there that any incidents of torture were not approved of nor condoned by the US government either, is there?
That's always been the Bush administrations policy. Deny everything as long as you can. Maher Arar: We were not responsible for his removal to Syria. -- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The US Department of State: "The United States does not do extraordinary renditions and does not run secret detention facilities" -- at least, not until the President is forced to admit that, uh, yes, actually we
do.
More on the criminal investigations. Again , not helping make your case for you.
Criminal investigations which had led to convictions. Yet you claim that, quote,
it has never been established that the US has ever tortured in Afghanistan.
If that's so, then why have US military personnel acting on behalf of the United States of America in Afghanistan been convicted for systematically abusing US-held prisoners in Afghanistan? Wouldn't it be a judical murder to convict your fellow citizens wearing your uniform for something you, supposedly, do not do and have never done?
Ah, right. I forgot. That magical little qualifier
Mr. Poe mentions above. "The United States of America considers itself bound by the obligation under article 16 to prevent cruel, inhuman or degrading treatmentor punishment
only in so far as
- US-held detainees are being shackled to the ceiling and dangled no longer than 72 hours; one more minute past that amounts to torture, unless a Presidential executive order is issued to give special presidential authorization to go beyond that.
- US-held detainees may be beaten with electric cables as long as the pain caused does not exceed severe; a Presidential executive order may override the rule.
- US-held detainees may be stomped upon as long as the collective weight of the US personnel standing upon the detainee does not exceed 270 lbs; a Presidential executive order may override the rule.
- US-held detainees may be sodomized with a blunt implement so long as the thickness of the implement does not exceed 3 inches; a Presidential executive order may override the rule if the President of the United States of America deems that the use of objects smaller than 3'' would prevent or limit administrative proceeding by the Central Intelligence Agency or by any individual acting on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency.
To
paraphrase the AG-designate
Mukasey, the Bush administration's torture business is worse than a sin. Torture is immoral and ineffective.
The part where nobody else seems to get that he says "We don't torture" in the same sense that the administration uses "We don't torture" -- as in, "We perform acts which are abominations to human rights, but we choose not to call it 'torture,' ergo, we don't torture. We do, however, render suspected terrorists to foreign governments who do torture, but since they are not us, 'we' still don't torture."
Heard it all before.
Kind of like torturer is as torturer does, huh?
