I think what he meant was, "We only torture when it is really necessary!"

I wonder if the four people known to have died at the hands of the C.I.A. had autopsies, to determine how someone could have perished from an "advanced interrogation technique."

Yahoo had a news article on similar that said:

Bush did not manipulate pre-war intelligence, says Advisor.(that would be Hadley)

further down the news article said:
Clyde didn't rob banks, says Bonnie

From the article on "enhanced interrogation techniques"...
"...The US Senate voted 90-9 early last month to attach an amendment authored by Republican Senator John McCain to a defense spending bill that would prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of detainees in US custody..."

Who were the 9?

Let's not kid ourselves about the "trick ourselves into believing so we can get to sleep at night" part. These people have NO trouble sleeping, and they do it in coffins, filled with Transylvanian soil, in the basement of the Whitehouse.

Sounds like the "Clear Skies" and "Healthy Forests" namers have been at it again.

#4 - Joan --- The 9 were:

Allard (R-CO)
Bond (R-MO)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Stevens (R-AK)

Kerry Takes Bush to Task on his Veteran’s Day Speech
November 14th, 2005

John Kerry took Bush to task on his Veteran’s Day Speech, on the Senate Floor today. In a fiery rhetoric, Kerry blasted Bush today, on the lies he spewed in his speech, last Friday — from the rush to war based based on faulty intelligence data, to the spin Bush put on Kerry’s own statements, John Kerry pinned Bush on the carpet.

The following is the text of John Kerry’s Floor Statement:

MR. PRESIDENT, Veterans Day is sacred - or it is supposed to be. Veterans Day is a day to honor veterans, not to play attack politics. The President, who is Commander in Chief, should know and respect this.

Veterans Day originally marked the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, when the guns of World War I, the war to end all wars, finally fell silent. Instead of honoring that moment, instead of laying a wreath at the tomb of the unknown soldier at Arlington National Cemetery, instead of laying out a clear plan for success in Iraq, the President laid into his critics with an 11th hour rhetorical assault that dishonored America’s veterans and those serving today, even as he continued to distort the truth about his war of choice.

MORE

Okay, the next question is....

Who among the 9 are up for re-election in 2006?

Only Allard is from a state outside the Bible belt. The other eight are safe for re-election, because there are enough people in each of those states who believe Bush was sent by the one true God to save America from its enemies, and/or they believe their pastors, who tell them that's the case.

Colorado (Allard's state) has enough sane people that he could be in jeopardy.

Thanks, Arry. Judging by the unsullied state of our sacred electoral process, I'm sure they'll all be re-elected by comfortable margins.

kerry's credibility is a shriveled raisin.

Problem with Allard and CO is, we're home to Focus on the Family ...

HI Brad - You Rock! I would like to put this guy's head in a vice and tighten it down until he tells the truth. It wouldn't necessarily be a form of torture just my personal enhancement technic to squeeze the bushit out of his ears.

For Savanster: Don't understand how family values square with tolerance for torture, or, if one prefers, "enhanced interrogation techniques." My kids are grown, but I can't imagine how they could possibly explain to their children over the dinner table why the United States of America can't abide by the Geneva Convention. Family values?

At least, Hadley is acknowledging that we're doing something that could be interpreted as torture. That's a step forward.

My uncle was a POW in WW2. When I was a kid I remember hearing the stories of what went on there, followed by a very proud and defiant "Americans don't do stuff like that." The meaning being *they* do it but *we* don't. This whole thing makes me ill and ashamed.

#10 - RLM --- I think Alaska (Stevens) is another state outside the Bible belt.

By the way, none of the "9" are up for election in 2006 - eight are up in 2008; the other two - Bond and Coburn in 2010.

are these guys taking direction from the daily show,

"oh those there, they are not a motorcade of 100 police cruisers, its a freedom parade"

robert: How do the Republicans square family values with torture? Simple...they're hypocrites. When they preach "family values", they're full of lots of smelly shit.

How do they square family values with lying us into war?

How do they square family values with treason?

Hypocrites...who are full of shit.

Roberts from Kansas was one of the 9? Jeez...I can't believe it...the guy who whitewashed the 9/11 commisssion report...is for torture. It's part of the "Kansas" "family values".

.
.
.

"...Americans at large don't seem to have a clear-cut position on the use of torture. The latest Newsweek opinion poll found that 58 percent of the public would support torture to thwart a terrorist attack.

But the same survey showed that 51 percent of Americans believe it is rarely or never justified, while 44 percent said torture is often or sometimes justified to obtain important information...."

58%?!

44%?!

And people wonder why there's rising Anti-Americanism.

.
.
.

How reliable is information obtained with torture?

for Joan #23 to answer your question I quote Larry Johnson from "... And why it should never be done"

I'm a former CIA officer and a former counterterrorism official. During the last few months, I have spoken with three good friends who are CIA operations officers, all of whom have worked on terrorism at the highest levels. They all agree that torturing detainees will not help us. In fact, they believe that it will hurt us in many ways.

These are the very people the vice president wants to empower to torture — and they don't want to do it.

I have some experience of my own with "duress interrogation." Back when I was undergoing paramilitary training at a CIA facility in 1986, my colleagues and I were interrogated to prepare us in case we were taken hostage.

At one point we were "captured" by faux terrorists. After being stripped naked and given baggy military uniforms, we entered a CIA version of Gitmo. We were deprived of sleep for 36 hours, given limited rice and water and forced to stand in place. Our interrogators — all U.S. military personnel — coaxed and harangued us by turns.

Those of us who declined to cooperate were stuffed into punishment boxes — miniature coffins that induced claustrophobia. ...

After 30 hours, one of my classmates gave me up in exchange for a grape soda and a ham sandwich.

The lesson of this training was that everyone has a breaking point. But our instructors were not recommending breaking detainees through torture. Instead, they emphasized the need to build rapport and trust with people who had information we wanted.

Please read the original post at Booman Tribune.

Please also help spread the word: Torturing Detainees Will Not Help Us

For Arry: You're right. Alaska is not part of the Bible belt. I looked at the abbreviation "AK" and took it for Arkansas, which was dumb because I know that Stevens is from Alaska.

Alaskans have always been staunchly Republican. I suspect it has to do with their rugged frontier mentality. Self-sufficient, anti-government (except they do cash the checks they get just for moving there).

Stevens has been around forever; he's a liberal hater with a nasty disposition, the kind of person who could eassily convince himself that everyone being held at Guantanamo is a terrorist. I don't think most Alaskans are nasty, but at this point Stevens wields enormous power on account of his seniority, and Alaskans want to maintain that.

http://lucianne.com/routine/images/11-15-05.jpg

Under the new 'torture' definition the following activities have been re-named:

Anal Rape with a Phosphorous Light Stick will now be referred to as 'Precautionary Colonoscopy'

Water Boarding is now known as 'Intensive Lung Capacity Improvement Training'

Electric Shock to the Genitals is now known as 'High Voltage Terrorist Birth Control'

God Bless America! :plain:

but waterboarding cant be wrong if Sen. Kennedy does it?

The "deeply irresponsible" Bush is using to refer his critics is aimed at us! It is easy to see Bush going one step further and calling us terrorist sympathizers, then one step beyond that to locking us all us up, torturing us, denying us habeas corpus. I like to believe he won't stay in power for very long if he goes that far, but I am not so sure. I am sure that he won't go like Nixon, and will resort to things we can only have nightmares of before he is removed.

I think this administration, as repugnant as it is on the surface, is much worse that even we can imagine.

We can't let up for a second. They must be removed from power, charged with crimes against humanity, prosecuted, punished, humiliated, and the immorality and futility of their deeds indelibly stamped into history books and world culture.

whoa there #29 that's a lovely fantasy, but it it happens, who'll fill the mass graves? You forgot about the mass graves of progressives. Put down the crack pipe and back away from the keyboard slowly. You'll feel better soon. I'm old enough to remember when only crazy old John Bircher right wingnuts could write silliness like yours. Plus ca change, plus la meme chose. (yes: I meant "meme")

I am a veteran and frankly I would rather die in a nuclear explosion than give up part of what makes America "America". I would die fighting before I would sit still while America becomes the "beacon of torture". Here is a good letter that expresses my point. Support our troops!

A Matter of Honor

Wednesday, September 28, 2005; Page A21

The following letter was sent to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sept. 16:

Dear Senator McCain:

I am a graduate of West Point currently serving as a Captain in the U.S. Army Infantry. I have served two combat tours with the 82nd Airborne Division, one each in Afghanistan and Iraq. While I served in the Global War on Terror, the actions and statements of my leadership led me to believe that United States policy did not require application of the Geneva Conventions in Afghanistan or Iraq. On 7 May 2004, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's testimony that the United States followed the Geneva Conventions in Iraq and the "spirit" of the Geneva Conventions in Afghanistan prompted me to begin an approach for clarification. For 17 months, I tried to determine what specific standards governed the treatment of detainees by consulting my chain of command through battalion commander, multiple JAG lawyers, multiple Democrat and Republican Congressmen and their aides, the Ft. Bragg Inspector General's office, multiple government reports, the Secretary of the Army and multiple general officers, a professional interrogator at Guantanamo Bay, the deputy head of the department at West Point responsible for teaching Just War Theory and Law of Land Warfare, and numerous peers who I regard as honorable and intelligent men.

Instead of resolving my concerns, the approach for clarification process leaves me deeply troubled. Despite my efforts, I have been unable to get clear, consistent answers from my leadership about what constitutes lawful and humane treatment of detainees. I am certain that this confusion contributed to a wide range of abuses including death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder, exposure to elements, extreme forced physical exertion, hostage-taking, stripping, sleep deprivation and degrading treatment. I and troops under my command witnessed some of these abuses in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

This is a tragedy. I can remember, as a cadet at West Point, resolving to ensure that my men would never commit a dishonorable act; that I would protect them from that type of burden. It absolutely breaks my heart that I have failed some of them in this regard.

That is in the past and there is nothing we can do about it now. But, we can learn from our mistakes and ensure that this does not happen again. Take a major step in that direction; eliminate the confusion. My approach for clarification provides clear evidence that confusion over standards was a major contributor to the prisoner abuse. We owe our soldiers better than this. Give them a clear standard that is in accordance with the bedrock principles of our nation.

Some do not see the need for this work. Some argue that since our actions are not as horrifying as Al Qaeda's, we should not be concerned. When did Al Qaeda become any type of standard by which we measure the morality of the United States? We are America, and our actions should be held to a higher standard, the ideals expressed in documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Others argue that clear standards will limit the President's ability to wage the War on Terror. Since clear standards only limit interrogation techniques, it is reasonable for me to assume that supporters of this argument desire to use coercion to acquire information from detainees. This is morally inconsistent with the Constitution and justice in war. It is unacceptable.

Both of these arguments stem from the larger question, the most important question that this generation will answer. Do we sacrifice our ideals in order to preserve security? Terrorism inspires fear and suppresses ideals like freedom and individual rights. Overcoming the fear posed by terrorist threats is a tremendous test of our courage. Will we confront danger and adversity in order to preserve our ideals, or will our courage and commitment to individual rights wither at the prospect of sacrifice? My response is simple. If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. I would rather die fighting than give up even the smallest part of the idea that is "America."

Once again, I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for.

With the Utmost Respect,

-- Capt. Ian Fishback

1st Battalion,

504th Parachute Infantry Regiment,

82nd Airborne Division,

Fort Bragg, North Carolina

My wish for Christmas...

Blow me... #27--oh, that's funny!

Castro #30, try to focus. Try. Try even harder.

Captain Fishbach again. Ok, if I can provide 2 Marine officers that contradict fishback does that render his testimony false? What's your standard of corroboration other than consonance with what you want to believe? Have a FREE SCOOTER(libby) PIE!

Soledad is right on top of things now!

Caster Oil - It's you and your ilk who will happily dig the mass graves and wag your filthy tails, hoping for a scrap from the feast or at least a pat on the head. And when they're done with you and your ilk, you'll be left to fight among yourselves. No thanks! I'll stay, and fight the good fight, thank you, and you and your ilk can slink off into the night. Wake up and enjoy the white phosphorous! It's for you the troll smells...

PS And quit defaming Fidel - I wouldn't take 100 duhbayas for one Fidel! A SCOOTER FIE on you!

I would be very interested in hearing testimony from two Marine officers who want to torture POW's! Bring 'em on! Semper Fi!

My husband is a ex Marine. If he wasn't dying from Agent Orange exposure I could push his government issue wheelchair over to the keyboard and he could give you a discourse on HONOR!

O.K., O.K., I know I have too much time on my hands, but I'm smelling a series with this. Anyone else want to try? Don't worry, Brad --- I won't clutter the comments up anymore with my satire (not on this thread, anyhow --- MMMMwoooohahahahah!)

Still waitin' to hear from those leathernecks of which you speak.

"Plus ca change, plus la meme chose". The more things change, the more they stay the same. You're right on that Castro. Pre-WWII Germany all over again, and its people like you that make it possible. You should be proud - before your fall that is!

Hell, I'll make it easy for ya. Just give me a the names and testimony of a couple of jarheads who want to torture POW's.
How about you Fidel? Give us your stories from behind enemy lines...HA!

Damn chickenhawks...

1) settle down jo. I didn't say they "want to torture" merely that they dispute fishback. If you could read you'd know that. I'll post some references later. Despite being retired, I still have things that need to be done.

2) #41 if you can equate bush to hitler then you can equate stalin to mother teresa - after all they both thought of the poor

#43: ok, found this one quickly - more later

http://www.americanthink...d=4069&search=marine

Contradict Fishback in what way? The need for guidelines? Or that Cheney is right about torture being necessary?

Anyone notice that Hadley looks like a Manequin?

The UN now admits of 30,000 Iraqi dead (link here). Hadley wants to redefine "Iraqi dead" as breathing challenged Iraqis.

And republicans are calling for a withdrawal from Iraq (link here). Hadly is calling withdrawl an advance to American soil.

There was nothing condoning torture in this marines letter.

Dear Jo,

I'm so sorry to hear about your husband. Please, both of you, know that there are a lot of us out here who feel terribly about what happened to him, and about what we allowed to happen in our name, and that we'll never forget. I served in the army from 65 to 69 but somehow never got sent to 'nam, and although I know I was lucky I still feel guilty, since my brothers were there and I wasn't. Let's make a special effort now to get our young men and women out of DUland, before they're fucked up for life - then we can start trying to somehow make ammends to the innocent Iraqis we've so grievously injured. As for Castor Oil, let him stew in his own foul juices.

Love and Peace from Prague, Bob

Thank you for your kind words and your service to America. I think there is a special place in Hell for those who defend torture. My point is that America and our troops are better than our leaders. Any Marine knows torture is wrong and would not want to participate, but without guidelines mistakes are made. This is a horrible burden to carry. As for Cheney WANTING our troops to torture. I can't begin to express how sick this makes me feel.

#49: do you have the same compassion for the iraqi's in saddams mass graves or the serb civilians we incinerated? Love and peace from Iowa.

Cheney _WANTS_ are troops to torture? ohmygoshkis - that mean's he's on the same side as Alan Dershowitz. That means he's liberal and jewish. Oh well, 1 outta 2 is a start.

COMMENT #38 [link]
...Jo said on 11/15/2005 @ 7:33am PT...

"My husband is a ex Marine. If he wasn't dying from Agent Orange exposure I could push his government issue wheelchair over to the keyboard and he could give you a discourse on HONOR! "

Jo,

If Agent Orange WASN'T killing your Marine, Chimpy the Sock Monkey & the rest of his Chickenhawk Flock probably would've ordered him back to active duty!

He is a fool and a coward!

Cheney is a fool and a coward. My husband is an honorable brave, dignified, patriotic American. Just wanted to clarify that. :0)

but alan "the liberal lion" dershowitz does endorse the use of terror in defined circumstances

Castro - this is not about liberal vs. conservative. It's about right vs. wrong, American vs. UN-American, evil vs. good, stupid vs. intelligent, criminal vs. law abiding, traitorous vs. patriotic............

We all know what side you're on!

You're on the same side as Deshowitz and Cheny - just totbe perfectly clear.

A Raw Story article indicates that the number of prisoners has doubled (link here).

Evidently they are running out of prison space, and over 100 Iraqi folks were found in a government building. They had been tortured and some were paralyzed as a result .

Also those outside of the prisons are being tortured by napalm or napalm-like substances that burn off their skin.

And Cheney is proud.

#56: as you're ever so righteous, do you disavow torture under ALL circumstances. Mr. Dershowitz was quite specific about when he thought it was allowable.

Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin

[BuzzFlash Interview]

[snip] BuzzFlash: One of the fog facts that's perpetuated in people’s minds is the fallacy that torturing prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib actually yields reliable intelligence and information to save American lives.

Most Americans who hear that seem intuitively to think: Well, it's dark, but that kind of makes sense.

Larry Beinhart: The intuitive logic of it is very compelling. And we see it in dramatic television all the time.

There was a quote somewhere --- and I wish I knew where it was --- that a lot of the guys who were beating up prisoners in Abu Ghraib were basing their conduct on Sipowicz from "NYPD Blue."

We constantly see people bullying information out of other people so as to save the kidnap victim, to save the victim of the psychopathic serial killer, to save Los Angeles from the terrorist bomb. And it makes great drama. It makes intuitive sense --- that we should be able to beat the truth out of people.

The U.S. Army, in its manifest wisdom, and probably out of experience --- the Army manual on interrogation says torture doesn’t work. It leads to bad information.

· And, furthermore, we have the situation now, where we’re picking up people who we think vaguely, maybe, might be, could be terrorists, or associated with terrorists, or know a terrorist, or the cousins of a terrorist, especially the people we’re rounding up in Iraq off the street. There are these street roundups and they throw them in prison.

[… 6 degrees of separation … scary. When does trouble come knocking on your garden gate? /kira …]

· In contrast, in World War II, we were capturing soldiers who were actual members of armies whose known intent was to attack our soldiers within the next five minutes, or the next day, and who could know the disposition of their troops, and their intentions.

And yet the U.S. military, of the greatest generation, took the high ground and said that torture is wrong and we shouldn’t do it. And not only that. We prided ourselves on never doing it, and always saying that it is wrong.

BuzzFlash: It doesn’t seem like we base many decisions on facts anymore. Certainly the Bush Administration doesn’t. [snip]

Castro Conard - il chercher la guerre pervers, subir les consquences.

"President Bush on Monday defended U.S. interrogation of terrorists, saying 'We do not torture.' He added, 'We freedom electrocute.'" --Amy Poehler on "Saturday Night Live"

Castro - #56 is your post, but assuming you mean me #57 then yes I do disavow torture under any circumstances. Kira said it well - torture dosen't work.

Imagine six similar but independent murders take place. The police torture a suspect into confessing to all six. Result: five or maybe all six murders go free to murder again and laugh at the stupidity of the police and the victims.

Before you come back - yes I can think of instances where torture might produce actionable intellengence, but cost is always too high.

well #63 you get asymptotically close to reality. It's black&white, neocon style thinking to think the cost is always too high. But, I commend you, at least you're rational.

you'll love this
http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/111505.wmv

Dershowitz may be a fool, but Cheney is a fool AND VP. Torture is un-American and disgraceful . The fact that the VP of the USA is advocating for it is shameful. As many of you know I work at the VA. I have patients who were "guests" of the VC (Nam) and Japanese (WW2). Torture is wrong,wrong,wrong. Cheney is a man without honor. (at least I think he is a man) He reminds me of those pod creatures that break out of the pod in Sci-Fi movies. Cheney is the worst kind of fool. He is a fool with power.

Fun strip, TruantDuck!

"According to the latest poll, 66% of Americans believe Dick Cheney has been given too much power by President Bush, and the other 34% think President Bush has been given too much power by Dick Cheney." --Jay Leno

Are you a criminal, Stephen Hadley?

Maybe you're the one who's going into the big black prison for breaking the law.....rather than me and the rest who you want to take "care of" so they don't find out about your MAFIA DRUG DEALER bosses......

Doug E.

Castro - Regarding your link - you still don't get it. It is not liberal vs. conservative as I tried to explain to you before. You've got to see the light some sooner or later.

Clinton and Albright were wrong, but at least Clinton was smart enough to know it was wrong and just postured for political expedience. He and Bush 41 were too smart to lie us into an un-winable war.

Castro, Noticed you were from Iowa in #51. I was born in Cedar Rapids. Keep your doors locked tonight.

Tue Nov 15, 12:18 AM
IOWA CITY, Iowa - Authorities searched on Tuesday for two convicted murderers who escaped from the Iowa State Penitentary by using a homemade grappling hook to scale an unguarded section of the prison's limestone walls.

Martin Shane Moon, 34, and Robert Joseph Legendre, 27, broke out Monday night from the prison in Fort Madison, where they were serving life sentences.

After Cheney et al are found guilty by Patrick Fitzgerald, their trials will be held at The Hague.

Veterans speak against torture: I taught the Geneva Conventions

by Thomas F. Dewey Jr.
SojoMail 11-16-2005
I was an army judge advocate general corps officer in the 1970s, and one of my duties was to teach classes to the troops on the Geneva Conventions. Our soldiers were instructed to give only "name, rank, and social security number" to the enemy. Providing any further information could be an act of treason, for which there was a possibility of court-martial once the prisoner was released.

There had been various incidents during the Vietnam War, such as the My Lai massacre, in which Lt. William Calley was tried by court-martial for the murders of women and children, which provided clear examples of what should not be done by U.S. soldiers. The classes taught that individual soldiers had a duty to disobey unlawful orders. An unlawful order to kill a civilian should not be followed. The Nuremberg trails of Nazi war criminals stood for the proposition that following the orders of Adolph Hitler to kill Jews was not a legal defense. What is the value of these kinds of historical precedents to our present governmental leaders?

It disturbs me greatly that it seems our leaders are willing to allow the enemy to define the brutality limits of our conduct. If the enemy cuts off the heads of prisoners, then should we be able to do likewise? Why do we suspend our rules for civilized behavior when the enemy is a certain group? I fear that if our government chooses not to follow the rules of the Geneva Convention regarding treatment of enemy combatants, a next step may be its applying similar rules to enemies of the government living in the United States. If we can treat enemy soldiers so that they are brutalized and even killed while in our custody, then perhaps our own government will find a similar justification to torture our own citizens who commit murders and assaults on other citizens. Even though our police aren't supposed to beat confessions out of someone in custody, will the thinking of our leaders somehow conclude that individuals should not have rights, just like enemy combatants in this war against terror are not to have rights to be treated according to the Geneva Conventions?

It seems clear to me that Jesus Christ would not support a policy of prisoner abuse, and yet so many of our leaders who profess to be firm believers in Christ choose to sidestep the issue of what duty each of them has to oppose the practice of prisoner abuse. I wonder if George Bush had been called to active duty as a pilot during the Vietnam War and shot down over Hanoi, would he have wanted to be treated as a prisoner under rules of the Geneva Conventions, or under rules that would permit him to be beaten, drugged, humiliated, and possibly even killed by his captors for the crime of being an American? Someone should ask him such a question. It would certainly be interesting to hear his reply.

An interrogator's testimony

by Joshua Casteel
SojoMail 11-16-2005
Silence. Silence is what you hear when a faithful, patriotic and decorated West Point graduate shows enough integrity to break ranks and tell the truth.

Capt. Ian Fishback is a man, who like me, once swore to live by the U.S. Military Academy honor code: "A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do." But we'll come back to this later. Since the president's open declaration that fighters in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the war on terrorism do not fall under the traditional parameters of the law of land warfare, much murmur has filled brass hallways, and occupied the tongues of talk show hosts regarding the use and place of torture. Who is an "enemy prisoner of war"? How ought the state apply the Geneva Conventions to combatants not associated to a standing national army?

When an officer with 17 months of eyewitness investigation comes forward with a detailing of actual events, few forums pick it up. But perhaps more shocking than the near silence of the national press, is the silence of Fishback's fellow West Pointers. Perhaps they don't know Fishback helped Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) construct the "humane treatment of prisoners" amendment to H.R. 2863, which professed Christians are opposing and another professed Christian has stated he will veto should it pass the gauntlet of the House of Representatives. The silence is breathtaking. Few peeps from the press. Nothing from public Christian figures who would have to stomach the awful reality of supporting a born-again president who is about to veto human rights. Nothing from the long gray line, including an officer who was once Fishback's and my commandant of cadets, but has since then earned three stars and now sits alongside Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for Senate appearances.

So, back to the honor code. If Fishback is lying - conjuring up 17 months of policy investigation, warnings from superiors to mind his career, and abuses of "prisoners under control," including blowing off steam in PUC tents, smashing legs with Louisville Sluggers - then where are all the West Pointers with enough integrity to blow the whistle on this whistle blower? Why aren't they coming out in droves to turn in this liar, to call his bluff? Perhaps it is for the same reason Rumsfeld vindicates his appearances before the Senate with talk of war fighting "in the spirit of the Geneva Conventions." The same reason the president feels no contradiction landing his first presidential veto on an amendment capable of demythologizing Rumsfeld's fictitious comments. The same reason eight rogue soldiers from the night shift obtained national scorn and reprobation while their commanding general obtained his fourth star.

In the weeks following The Washington Post's publication of Fishback's letter to McCain, and subsequent passing of the McCain amendment in the Senate, AndrewSullivan.com and Human Rights Watch were among few entities covering this story with regularity. If it weren't for blogs and watchdog agencies, I myself would know nothing of this courageous captain's actions. On the floor of the Senate on Oct. 5, McCain read these words of Fishback's letter: "I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for."

Fishback's letter also states, "If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession." This is the sad reality which continued silence on torture can only confirm. That honor codes are merely modes of self-affirmation. That principles can be cast aside as soon as temporal disadvantage says so loudly enough. It confirms that public discourse of professed values does not depend upon a simultaneous conversation of reality - the way the world actually is now. Because reality might unsettle the soil, make us see things we'd wished we'd not.

It is easier to isolate narrowly confined incidents and behavior. Scowl and point a finger at eight lower enlisted personnel, but never ask a question aimed at understanding our own governing dynamics. When all the cameras of the world turned on Abu Ghraib, I interrogated prisoners under the gaze of cameras and visiting dignitaries. We dressed to the nines and followed procedure. Nothing truly CNN-worthy ever happened during my six-month stay. And we heard about it when visiting interrogators showed up on base. "Abu Ghraib is soft," they would say. Things work differently "out there." And we saw it on the bodies of detainees not sped to the rear [sent out of the custody of the combat units who captured them] like doctrine dictates. Is it odd things like this continue to happen in an atmosphere of intentional policy obfuscation? Or am I the only one unsure what Rumsfeld means when he uses phrases like "in the spirit of the Geneva Conventions"? Is that like believing deep down in your heart that you're a good person despite continued sins against your neighbor?

With all the professed Christianity and value talking floating about these days, and so little virtuous action like that of Fishback ever achieving the incarnation from word to flesh, perhaps a necessary question is simply: When does believing something mean you also have to also do something about it? When does belief in redemption ever finally require an action of confession? And when does a proper confession require an action of penance? When will the West Pointers break silence? When will professed Christian leaders break ranks long enough to care more about truth and virtue than the evangelistic statements they get to make about these ideals in front of cameras? When will an idea-obsessed society learn that you must tell a tree by its fruit? And when fruit is rotten, there's something wrong in the soil. It's not always easy, but the Fishbacks of the world have the courage to tell us our fruit is rotten. People like Fishback and McCain tell us these things because they believe we can do better, as a people and even in the government. It appears, though, that we are simply looking for the next best technique to find affirmation in our own self-perception. We are who we say we are, even if we're not.

Thank you, Sen. McCain. Thank you, Capt. Fishback. Thank you for loving reality as much as you love your ideals. Thank you for having the integrity to speak in the midst of such silence.

Joshua Casteel was an interrogator and Arabic linguist at Abu Ghraib from June 2004 to January 2005. Casteel, raised as a conservative evangelical, was a West Point cadet at the same time as Capt. Ian Fishback. Now a Catholic, he was discharged honorably as a conscientious objector in May, and has since begun speaking and writing about his experiences in Iraq.

May 13, 2004

Letter on US military interrogation survival techniques.

This from a former Air Force pilot, who writes:

Allow me to echo some of what you've probably heard from your other sources/readers regarding interrogation techniques and the pictures we've seen.

I went through a extremely benign POW training course 20+ years ago as a newly minted tactical aviator (all aircrew go through this). They kept us awake for two days, kept us standing at attention with hoods over our heads in dark "cells" (think 4' x 4' broom closet with a coffee can for your toilet needs) or cramped inside small wooden boxes, and they took pictures of us in simulated compromising position (handed me a board to hold up at chest level, took a picture, I couldn't see the front of the board...a war criminal confession was printed on it). They put us in "stress positions" to simulate beatings.

All of this was to prepare us for capture by Warsaw Pact or North Korean forces.

Fast forward to [the early eighties] to my assignment in Germany. Each summer about a half dozen guys from AF fighter squadrons would play "evader" for a week being hunted by US Army forces. Volunteers knew they would be caught and interrogated for several days. I never volunteered. Guys were glad when it was over.

Every guy I knew that played this game of hide and seek spent two or three days and nights chained to a radiator (the room heater not the auto part)...wearing nothing but a hood and handcuffs. They also had the experience of getting their picture taken and hearing a woman ridicule the size of their penis while they were naked/hooded.

One squadron mate got particularly upset because he was extremely religious (woman's place is in the home raising kids etc). All of this was supposedly to prepare the participants for capture by Warsaw Pact forces. I never connected the dots that the Army was training for their mission to question prisoners.

Make of this what you will, the fact remains we invaded Iraq for dubious reasons and now we're in deep shit. Neither you nor I know if the Iraqis photographed were evil SOBs or innocent civilians. At this point it does not matter.

Let's hope that the good that comes from this will be that gwb and his cronies are unemployed come Jan 2005. The bad of course is the toxic damage to our (the USA's) image around the world. Then there is the clueless element of our citizenry that are blaming the Press for attacking "the american way of life and everything we stand for..."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So it doesn't sound like the perpetrators of abuse at Abu Ghraib necessarily dreamt those particular tortures up by themselves, but that there is some institutional memory of this stuff. Many tens of thousands of people must have been trained in these techniques, at least in terms of surviving them should they be caught by the enemy, right? Is this an open secret?

**MORE**

#29 onyx: I agree with you...but I'll go one step further: when Bush says disagreeing with his administration is "deeply irresponsible", he's calling a Jihad on us, by his freako dittohead followers, and that's exactly what they do when he makes statements like that. He's not completing his sentence, the rest of the sentence is, "...and I'm calling on all rightwing media and all hick dittoheads for a Jihad against all American citizens who disagree with me." He's being divisive, that's the Republican/Rove style. Divide everyone, and have everyone fighting, to distract from his illegalities. While he gets libs to fight rightwingers, Dems vs. Reps, he's busy cooking up a lie-storm for a war somewhere, ala the Iraq War (see Downing St. memos)...

Thomas F. Dewey Jr. writes from Clyde, Ohio:

I was an Army JAGC officer in the 1970s, and one of my duties was to teach classes to the troops on the Geneva Conventions....

It seems clear to me that Jesus Christ would not support a policy of prisoner abuse, and yet so many of our leaders who profess to be firm believers in Christ choose to sidestep the issue of what duty each of them has to oppose the practice of prisoner abuse. I wonder if George Bush had been called to active duty as a pilot during the Vietnam War and shot down over Hanoi, would he have wanted to be treated as a prisoner under rules of the Geneva Conventions, or under rules that would permit him to be beaten, drugged, humiliated, and possibly even killed by his captors for the crime of being an American? Someone should ask him such a question. It would certainly be interesting to hear his reply.

Veterans speak against torture
David F. Adams writes from Homewood, Illinois:

I personally witnessed prisoner abuse during the Vietnam War, and by witnessing and remaining silent became a participant....

When I saw the photos from Abu Ghrab prison, particularly those showing the use of dogs, I relived the incident seared into my mind 35 years ago. Would I, a young 22-year-old airman, have had the courage to say "no" if ordered to terrorize the prisoner with my dog? I regret I cannot say clearly that I would have. It would have been a no-win situation of defying an order on the one hand, and living with ignoring the higher law that exceeds orders given by mere mortals.

Our elected leaders have the responsibility to ensure that those who serve in uniform are not placed in no-win positions that will cause them to compromise their integrity and spiritual connection to God. In this, our elected officials have failed miserably. The inhumane incidents at Abu Ghraib were not the sole action of a "few bad apple MPs," as President Bush has contended; they were the direct result of this nation's decision to turn its back on the Geneva Conventions.

These are very powerful letters, Jo.

Any American with any decency and integrity (even just a little) must surely be dropping out of lockstep with this hideous regime.