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

Skip to comments.

'Whatever it takes': Protecting America is a dirty job
Manchester Union Leader ^ | September 19, 2006 | Editorial

Posted on 09/19/2006 5:21:12 AM PDT by billorites

There is a lot of confusion in the debate over how far the law should allow CIA officers to go when interrogating terrorists.

Let us be clear that we do not advocate torture. We advocate that the law be written to protect CIA officers from criminal prosecution if they use certain techniques that could be interpreted as forbidden under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

That article's vague wording forbids "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."

What does that mean? Who knows?

The Bush administration has authorized six "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" to be used by the CIA on only a dozen al-Qaida members. The techniques include grabbing a prisoner's shirt and shaking him, slapping, slapping the stomach (punches are not allowed), extended standing (which might include sleep deprivation), containment in a cold cell, and waterboarding. Not even Human Rights Watch argues that the techniques go beyond those listed.

Common Article 3 conceivably forbids all of these techniques.

Many former CIA officers have said that the best interrogation technique is to be kind and build rapport over time. But what happens when you don't have time?

Last fall a well-respected former Navy officer and torture opponent said that harsh interrogation techniques would be OK in a "ticking time bomb" scenario.

"It's a one in a million issue, and if something was one in a million situation, I would support whatever needs to be done," he said. "But that's a one in a million situation."

Those are the words of Sen. John McCain, who now proposes outlawing techniques he himself would approve in desperate situations.

We agree with Sen. McCain that aggressive interrogation techniques tend to be unproductive and ought not be used. We also agree with him that in extraordinary circumstances, aggressive techniques should be an option.

We disagree that Congress ought to outlaw these techniques for the primary goal of enhancing America's reputation.

If Sen. McCain "would support whatever needs to be done" to save American lives, then why does he want to make it a crime to do just that -- a crime that would subject our CIA officers to criminal prosecution if they use any technique that could be interpreted as "humiliating and degrading"?


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 09/19/2006 5:21:13 AM PDT by billorites
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: billorites

McCain admitted in his autobiography that torture worked on him; he gave the Vietnamese ship placement of our fleet.

But now he says that torture doesn't work.


2 posted on 09/19/2006 5:24:27 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze; Mo1
he Bush administration has authorized six "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" to be used by the CIA on only a dozen al-Qaida members. The techniques include grabbing a prisoner's shirt and shaking him, slapping, slapping the stomach (punches are not allowed), extended standing (which might include sleep deprivation), containment in a cold cell, and waterboarding. Not even Human Rights Watch argues that the techniques go beyond those listed.

Remember this the next time a leftist talks about torture.

3 posted on 09/19/2006 5:26:56 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
I think it is pretty dumb to publicize methods to be used. All the enemy has to do is train their people accordingly and the methods will work less or not at all.
4 posted on 09/19/2006 5:29:43 AM PDT by bennowens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: billorites

What I do not understand is why so many insist that the Geneva Convention trumps the Constitution of the United States. I have been accussed of being slow, stupid, anti-Semitic, and having the sense of a 13 year old by people on FR. Can someone explain to me why everyone thinks the Geneva Convention trumps the Constitution.


5 posted on 09/19/2006 5:30:44 AM PDT by 7thson (I've got a seat at the big conference table! I'm gonna paint my logo on it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Am I the only one who sympathized with Jack Nicholson's character in "A Few Good Men"?


6 posted on 09/19/2006 5:31:45 AM PDT by SlowBoat407 (I've had it with these &%#@* jihadis on these &%#@* planes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Every time that I make the statement that McCain sold us out, I get "where is the proof?" Can you help me out?
7 posted on 09/19/2006 5:37:25 AM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Peach
McCain admitted in his autobiography that torture worked on him; he gave the Vietnamese ship placement of our fleet.

As a tool in the hands of a trained, detached interrogator, torture works on over 99% of subjects. People who say otherwise are either referring to torture by brutal thugs who don't know what they're doing, or they're simply lying.

The only real considerations about torture are the moral aspects, and the fact that you need trained personnel to do it, which is another moral issue. Do you torture, ever? If so, you need people who know how to do it right. But then again, what kind of society keeps trained torturers on call? These aren't insignificant issues, and it's the reason we have traditionally outlawed the practice, effective as it may be.

8 posted on 09/19/2006 5:38:41 AM PDT by Steel Wolf (As Ibn Warraq said, "There are moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mariabush

There is conflicting information about this matter. McCain says he gave ship movements but only on ships he knew were already moved from the locations he gave.

And frankly, I don't blame him for caving to torture. It was brutal, what was done to him.

But for him to turn around and claim that torture doesn't work is simply wrong.


9 posted on 09/19/2006 5:43:30 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 7thson

It doesn't exactly "trump" the constitution, but rather falls into the same category as the constitution because of our founding document's inclusion of a process for signing and approving treaties. Because the conventions have been signed and approved under the constitution, they are considered to have the same weight (except when they directly contradict the constitution, in which case they should have never been ratified).

Does that help?


10 posted on 09/19/2006 5:48:31 AM PDT by MortMan (I was going to be indecisive, but I changed my mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf
But then again, what kind of society keeps trained torturers on call?

A society that is under threat from and has troops engaged in war with a determined enemy, that's what kind.

11 posted on 09/19/2006 5:58:35 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (No religion demands so much of it's members and so little of itself, than islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Common Article 3 conceivably forbids all of these techniques.

Good thing the Geneva Conventions deal with uniformed soldiers. I'd hate for it to apply to Al Qaeda.
12 posted on 09/19/2006 5:59:12 AM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites
...how far the law should allow CIA officers to go when interrogating terrorists...

Torture yields tainted information. Interrogation drugs do not. The only reason anyone would use torture is for the fun of it.

13 posted on 09/19/2006 6:02:55 AM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
But then again, what kind of society keeps trained torturers on call?

A society that is under threat from and has troops engaged in war with a determined enemy, that's what kind.

The question is both rhetorical and loaded. You could as easily ask 'What kind of society keeps 3000 nuclear weapons on hand' or 'What kind of society shoots bow and arrow wielding natives for their land'?

Earth is a rough place, and human history is a bloody, uncompromising affair. We decide what we think the times require, and act accordingly. We want to be a moral society that can look itself in the mirror, and can be an inspiration to others. Still, anyone that is alive today is here because their ancestors weren't above slitting throats to make sure they came out on top.

Where we draw the line on physical coercion is tricky, and the moral considerations for or against aren't as simple as people make them out to be. That's all I'm saying.

14 posted on 09/19/2006 6:07:38 AM PDT by Steel Wolf (As Ibn Warraq said, "There are moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf

I knew what you were saying SW. Agree with you.


15 posted on 09/19/2006 6:24:26 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (No religion demands so much of it's members and so little of itself, than islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

Yes it does. Thank you.


16 posted on 09/19/2006 6:31:34 AM PDT by 7thson (I've got a seat at the big conference table! I'm gonna paint my logo on it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: billorites
We disagree that Congress ought to outlaw these techniques for the primary goal of enhancing America's reputation.

Who were we torturing in 2000 or 2001. Our reputation won't be changed, it doesn't matter what we do. I don't know for sure why the world loves to hate the US but I'd reckon it is pure jealousy.

17 posted on 09/19/2006 6:45:14 AM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
That is what McLoser is upset about????

I've seen the pictures of what the terrorists did to our soldiers and Mcloser is upset about a slap???

McLoser can kiss my Irish rear end
18 posted on 09/19/2006 7:23:19 AM PDT by Mo1 (Think about it .. A Speaker Nancy Pelosi could be 2 seats away from being President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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