Torture

Here are some excerpts of a report by Physicians for Human Rights. Their original report is free online and has many references and footnotes. For reading ease, internal citations have been omitted.

"The use of psychological torture followed directly from decisions by the civilian leadership as well as high ranking military officers, including those in the Executive branch, and their support of decisions to 'take the gloves off' in interrogations and 'break' prisoners by employing techniques of psychological torture including sensory deprivation, isolation, sleep deprivation, forced nudity, the use of military working dogs to instill fear, cultural and sexual humiliation, mock executions, and the threat of violence or death toward detainees or their loved ones."

...

"The use of the psychologically abusive interrogation methods is immoral and is illegal under the Geneva Conventions and other sources of international law to which the United States is a party, civil domestic law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. US courts, international treaty bodies, UN special rapporteurs on torture, and the US State Department have all identified these techniques as a form of torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment."

...

"Combination of Techniques
The evidence points to a widespread and systematic application of these techniques, often in combination. According to the Fay report, a Criminal Investigation Command investigation found that, 'from December 2002, interrogators in Afghanistan were removing clothing, isolating people for long periods of time, using stress positions, exploiting fear of dogs and implementing sleep and light deprivation.' Detainees reported that at Guantánamo in late 2002, they observed techniques such as as short-shackling, loud music playing in interrogation, forced shaving of beards and hair, putting people in cells naked, taking away people’s comfort items, sleep deprivation, and the use of cold air. Other detainees report being subjected to a range of psychologically abusive interrogation techniques at various locations in Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004. In Iraq in 2003, the ICRC found numerous forms of illtreatment, including threats, insults, verbal abuse, hooding, sleep deprivation, forced nudity, and sexual humiliation, being used at various detention facilities. Other reports detail a similar combination of techniques used on detainees in Iraq in 2004.

A source familiar with conditions at Guantánamo in 2004 told PHR that US personnel there had devised a system to break people through a combination of humiliating acts, solitary confinement, temperature extremes, and use of forced positions. This was confirmed by an internal FBI e-mail that documented an incident observed by an agent at Guantánamo during February 2004. The agent observed a detainee who was short shackled, in a room with the temperature significantly lowered, and subjected to strobe lights and possibly loud music. The detainee was left in this condition for 12 hours, during which time he was not allowed to eat, pray or use the bathroom."

...

"The Executive Branch must end and prohibit the use of psychological torture, withdraw legal opinions that permit psychological torture and replace them with an interpretation faithful to the federal criminal anti-torture statute, publicly disclose interrogation rules, hold perpetrators accountable, rehabilitate and compensate victims of torture, permit ongoing monitoring, and promote ethical practice by military medical personnel. The US Congress must establish an independent commission to investigate, carry out its oversight responsibilities, and enact appropriate legislation. Given the Administration’s refusal to abide by law, its continued resistance to disclosure of its activities or its rules, a truly independent investigation and means of accountability is required."

Source: Borchelt, G. (2005). Break them down: Systematic use of psychological torture by US forces. Cambridge: Physicians for Human Rights.

The New York Times

On March 17, 2006, The New York Times published an article called "Democracy Push by Bush Attracts Doubters in Party." Here are its first two sentences:

"Even as it presents an updated national security strategy, the Bush administration is facing fresh doubts from some Republicans who say its emphasis on promoting democracy around the world has come at the expense of protecting other American interests.

The second thoughts signify a striking change in mood over one of President Bush's cherished tenets, pitting Republicans who call themselves realists against the neoconservatives who saw the invasion of Iraq as a catalyst for change and who remain the most vigorous advocates of a muscular American campaign to foster democratic movements."

PROBLEM: If you're going to use a term like "other American interests" you should define it. Otherwise, cynical people might think you're really talking about the economic interests of gigantic multi-national corporations, rather than the interests of ordinary citizens in, say, Ohio. The Paper of Record shouldn't wink.

PROBLEM: "[P]romoting democracy around the world" is "one of President Bush's cherished tenets." There is no evidence for this statement. This statement is propaganda and, in the truest sense, has no meaning and conveys no information.

PROBLEM: By "muscular American campaign," do you mean the use of force and military power? If so, then just call it that and stop lying. Killing civilians never becomes moral based on how you frame the issue.

PROBLEM: "But critics worry that antidemocratic extremists will prevail wherever tradition and existing civil institutions are too weak to protect the rights of minorities or to nurture moderates." In other words, if we don't like the people who win the election then something must be wrong with their democratic process. It couldn't possibly be that the process accurately reflects what the people in that country actually think. Welcome to some planet other than Earth.

PROBLEM: "Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is traveling this week in South America, Asia and Australia in part to promote democracy, acknowledges the growing dissent but says the administration will stick to its goals.

'There is a debate, and I think it's a debate that's healthy,' she said [Rhetoric that has no meaning]. 'This is obviously a really big change in American foreign policy, to put the promotion of democracy at the center of it [Then what did we support before we supported democracy? You mean American presidents officially supported something besides democracy?]. And people take very seriously what this president is doing and intends to do.' [No, they don't. People realize he is a joke who can barely speak when his words aren't prepared for him in advance. As a best case scenario, people realize he is a puppet being manipulated by evil people. You're one of them.]

PROBLEM: "It names as strongholds of tyranny North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Myanmar and Zimbabwe -- [but excludes Saudi Arabia?]." The idea that Cuba is a tyranny -- and the best paper in the world reports this with no context or analysis -- is idiotic and laughable or sad. This statement, right there, is proof that The New York Times is GARBAGE. If the newspaper were sold blank it would be of more use as an information source: you could use it as a diary, a canvas, or to make a grocery list.