Why the U.S. Iraqi outlook looks tortured
Friday, December 03, 2004
David Sarasohn
T hese days, stories about U.S. forces and torture barely break the surface of national interest. That realization by itself can strike you like an electric shock in an unpleasant place.
This week, two reports about U.S. treatment of prisoners appeared, before dropping away to the lack of interest that now greets all those stories, including an August resolution by the American Bar Association that we really need a high-level commission to look at who's responsible.
On Wednesday, The Washington Post revealed a "confidential report to Army generals in Iraq in December 2003" that warned about abuse of detainees, a report that was distributed before the revelation of torture at Abu Ghraib prison. The Post noted that the report, by retired Col. Stuart Herrington, an intelligence specialist in Operation Desert Storm and in Vietnam, found that "members of an elite military and CIA task force were abusing prisoners," as well as keeping their imprisonment secret and off the official books.
Tuesday, The New York Times reported that in July the International Committee of the Red Cross had notified the United States that some treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was "tantamount to torture." The Red Cross listed "humiliating acts, solitary confinement, temperature extremes, use of forced positions" and said the methods were "more refined and repressive" than the ones seen on previous visits to Guantanamo.
(snip)
Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, later denied that anybody was tortured, without denying the charges. "We certainly don't think it's torture," Myers told a news conference. "You've got to remember what kind of people we're dealing with. These people don't know any moral boundaries."
(snip/...)
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_sarasohn/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1102078759202480.xml