Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Anti-Bubba182; All
Sen. Carl Levin was reading from the text of the rules. Some of the techniques such as "sensory deprivation," "stress positions," "dietary manipulation," forced changes in sleep patterns, isolated confinement and the use of dogs were mentioned in the quote on my post 7. It is massively unlikely that Levin or other Dem. would have missed an opportunity to disclose sexual humiliation as a permitted technique if it was on the list.

It was left off the list...you had to get to the last 10 minutes of the two hour History Channel presentation to hear the Gitmo practice of "Attacking the manhood of Muslim Males by putting them in with Women interrorgators who could go "In their face"...

As someone pointed out, Dog leashes and other things seen were NOT standard issue to the MP's, but the Military Intel types had them to control the Intimidation Dogs.

Look, that General Martin who commanded Camp X-RAY at Gitmo didn't decide to GITMOIZE the Iraqi Intel situation on his own...Sanchez, as overall commander in Iraq, had to request the change.

Every one is blaming the Female General, yet Martin ordered her, citing Sanches's Authority, to turn over the Prison to him.

Look, the History Channel will sell you a Video of the "We Can Make You Talk" program...as I said, the practice of using Females to "Attack their Manhood" at Camp X-RAY occurrs about 10 minutes before the end.

It was so striking that I called my son's attention to it, saying "THAT is just what has been going on in Iraq!"

54 posted on 05/25/2004 7:08:54 PM PDT by Lael (Patent Law...not a single Supreme Court Justice is qualified to take the PTO Bar Exam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Lael
The list referred to in post 7 was "a set of interrogation "rules of engagement" used in Iraq." It was the what was supposed to apply in Iraq and some of those procedures required authorization by Gen. Sanchez.

As far as having female interogators, in an Islamic culture the mere fact of having a women to do the interogation or give orders to men might be enough to shock them or "Attack their Manhood", but that by itself could not be a violation of the Geneva Convention or American principles. What did the program on the history channel say the women specifically say they did, other than "In their face..."?

55 posted on 05/25/2004 8:20:07 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson