By Kenneth J. Theisen, 3/22/07
The Associated Press reports
that according to the International Committee of the Red Cross 14 prisoners,
previously held by the CIA for years in secret prisons and now detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were imprisoned and
interrogated under highly abusive conditions.
The prisoners told the Red Cross that they were subjected to various
abusive interrogation techniques, including long periods of sleep-deprivation,
and being forced to stand for lengthy periods and or put in other “stress
positions.”
A CIA spokesperson, Mark
Mansfield, stated yesterday that the agency does not practice or condone
torture. He stated the, “CIA’s terrorist
interrogation program has been conducted lawfully, with great care and close
review, producing vital information that has helped disrupt plots and save
lives.” But while the CIA denies
the use of torture it does admit the use of “enhanced interrogation
techniques.” These EITs include the
slapping of suspects, induced hypothermia, sleep deprivation and waterboarding,
or simulated drowning of prisoners. Of
course those practicing these “techniques” claim they do not constitute
torture, but those on the receiving end would dispute that assertion. In September 2006 President Bush defended
these CIA practices when he claimed, “The [interrogation] procedures were
tough, and they were safe, and lawful, and necessary.” He left out that he ordered them after
receiving legal advice from such notable humanitarians as now Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales who referred to the Geneva Conventions against torture as
“quaint.”
During a recent Combatant
Status Review Tribunal hearing authorized by Congress last year under the
Military Commissions Act, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed allegedly confessed
involvement in 31 plots including the 9/11 attacks. At his hearing he stated he was tortured. On March 12, 2007 Walid Muhammad bin Attash,
another of the 14 CIA detainees,
reportedly admitted to organizing the 2000 attack on the U.S. destroyer
Cole and the attacks against U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.
Bush regime supporters are
now using these alleged confessions to justify practices of “enhanced
interrogation techniques” or what most people would consider torture. But even assuming that these two individuals
actually committed all they “confessed,” this does not justify the use of
torture. (After being held 4 years in
CIA custody and after their torture, it is surprising that they did not also
confess to the 1865 assassination of Abraham Lincoln and the 1898 sinking of
the Maine.)
Are we to allow torture of
alleged “terrorists” to be conducted in our name? What about all those rounded up and eventually
released because they were innocent?
There have been many documented cases in this so-called “war on terror”
of just such innocent people. Many of
these people were also tortured by government agents. (I would suggest people read the book, “Enemy
Combatant: My Imprisonment at Guantanamo,
Bagram, and Kandahar”
by Moazzam Begg. He is a British citizen
who was kidnapped, detained for years, and tortured by the U.S. government
before his release.) We all have heard
about documented abuses at prisons in Afghanistan
and Iraq.
In these two countries alone, several
thousand people have been detained, abused, and then released after no evidence
could be found to justify their further incarceration. Many have been murdered during their
incarceration as well. The victims
include women and children.
Yes, there are people that are
terrorists and they have done much harm.
But can we as civilized people condone the torture of any human being
and should torture be the policy of our government? I hope you answer, “No, I do not want torture
to be practiced by the U.S.
government in my name.” My next question
is what will you do to stop this practice?