Showing posts with label torture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label torture. Show all posts

A closer look at torture

05/11/2007 — 0 comment(s)

There isn't much difference between the Bush administration's interrogation policy and the techniques used by the Khmer Rouge.

October 2, 2006 6:05 PM

A few days ago, I was talking to a Senate aide about Afghanistan and the lack of a coherent US policy regarding the rising troubles there. Toward the end of the conversation, this aide, Jonah Blank (who is also an anthropologist), mentioned as an aside that he had photographs of an actual waterboard.

For those of you not paying attention to the debate in the United States over suitable practices for interrogating a terrorism suspect, waterboarding has been a central example of what critics of the Bush administration's policy oppose. Last week, as members of Congress considered legislation favoured by the White House that would govern (to a limited degree) how suspects are interrogated and how evidence obtained during brutal interrogations (or some might call torture sessions) could be used against suspects in military tribunals, there was much talk about the practice of waterboarding. But waterboarding was usually described in the media in a matter-of-fact manner. The Washington Post simply referred to waterboarding recently as an interrogation measure that "simulates drowning". That is, few people knew what waterboarding entails or looks like - myself included.

So when Blank offered me copies of his photos of a waterboard and of a painting depicting a waterboarding session, I quickly accepted. When I received them, I asked if I could post the images on my blog. Blank gave me permission. Inside a day, my blog - a modest operation - received nearly 80,000 visitors, and other sites ran the photos as well. They were a mini-sensation. One expert on torture told me that there are few images of waterboarding in the public domain and that Blank had done a tremendous public service.

Blank, a former senior editor of US News & World Report and the author of the books Arrow of the Blue-Skinned God and Mullahs on the Mainframe, took the photos last month at Tuol Sleng Prison in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The prison is now a museum that documents Khmer Rouge atrocities. And the shots show one of the waterboards that had been used by the Khmer Rouge. Here's the first:

waterboard

Here's another view:

waterboard2

How did they work? Here's a painting by a former prisoner that shows the waterboard in action:

waterboard3

In an email to me, Blank explained the significance of the photos. (His observations are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the senators for whom he works.) He wrote:

The crux of the issue before Congress can be boiled down to a simple question: Is waterboarding torture? Anybody who considers this practice to be "torture lite" or merely a "tough technique" might want to take a trip to Phnom Penh. The Khmer Rouge were adept at torture, and there was nothing "lite" about their methods. Incidentally, the waterboard in these photos wasn't merely one among many torture devices highlighted at the prison museum. It was one of only two devices singled out for highlighting (the other was another form of water-torture - a tank that could be filled with water or other liquids; I have photos of that too.) There was an outdoor device as well, one the Khmer Rouge didn't have to construct: chin-up bars. (The prison where the museum is located had been a school before the Khmer Rouge took over.) These bars were used for "stress positions" - another practice employed under current US guidelines. At the Khmer Rouge prison, there is a tank of water next to the bars. It was used to revive prisoners for more torture when they passed out after being placed in stress positions.

The similarity between practices used by the Khmer Rouge and those currently being debated by Congress isn't a coincidence. As has been amply documented (The New Yorker had an excellent piece, and there have been others), many of the "enhanced techniques" came to the CIA and military interrogators via the SERE [Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape] schools, where US military personnel are trained to resist torture if they are captured by the enemy. The specific types of abuse they're taught to withstand are those that were used by our Cold War adversaries. Why is this relevant to the current debate? Because the torture techniques of North Korea, North Vietnam, the Soviet Union and its proxies - the states where US military personnel might have faced torture - were not designed to elicit truthful information. These techniques were designed to elicit confessions. That's what the Khmer Rouge et al were after with their waterboarding, not truthful information.

The bottom line is: Not only do waterboarding and the other types of torture currently being debated put us in company with the most vile regimes of the past half-century; they're also designed specifically to generate a (usually false) confession, not to obtain genuinely actionable intel. This isn't a matter of sacrificing moral values to keep us safe; it's sacrificing moral values for no purpose whatsoever.

These photos are important because most of us have never seen an actual, real-life waterboard. The press typically describes it in the most anodyne ways: a device meant to "simulate drowning" or to "make the prisoner believe he might drown." But the Khmer Rouge were no jokesters, and they didn't tailor their abuse to the dictates of the Geneva convention. They - like so many brutal regimes - made waterboarding one of their primary tools for a simple reason: it is one of the most viciously effective forms of torture ever devised.

The photos, of course, made no difference. The Republican-controlled Congress passed Bush's detainee legislation. The act explicitly permits the use of evidence obtained through waterboarding and other forms of torture. Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and other top al-Qaida leaders have reportedly been subjected to this technique. They might certainly note - or try to note - that at any trial. But with this legislation, the White House has declared the use of waterboarding (at least in the past) as a legitimate practice of the US government - which puts the Bush administration in the good company of the Khmer Rouge

source :: Guardian

Donald Rumsfeld charged with torture during trip to France

27/10/2007 — 2 comment(s)
Press release
France/USA

Complaint Filed Against Former Defense Secretary for Torture, Abuse
at Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib

October 26, 2007, Paris, France – Today, the International Federation
for Human Rights (FIDH) along with the Center for Constitutional
Rights (CCR), the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights
(ECCHR), and the French League for Human Rights (LDH) filed a
complaint with the Paris Prosecutor before the "Court of First
Instance" (Tribunal de Grande Instance) charging former Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld with ordering and authorizing torture.
Rumsfeld was in Paris for a talk sponsored by Foreign Policy magazine.

"The filing of this French case against Rumsfeld demonstrates that we
will not rest until those U.S. officials involved in the torture
program are brought to justice. Rumsfeld must understand that he has
no place to hide. A torturer is an enemy of all humankind," said CCR
President Michael Ratner.

"France is under the obligation to investigate and prosecute
Rumsfeld's accountability for crimes of torture in Guantanamo and
Iraq. France has no choice but to open an investigation if an alleged
torturer is on its territory. I hope that the fight against impunity
will not be sacrificed in the name of politics. We call on France to
refuse to be a safe haven for criminals." said FIDH President Souhayr
Belhassen.

"We want to combat impunity and therefore demand a judicial
investigation and a criminal prosecution wherever there is
jurisdiction over the torture incidents," said ECCHR General
Secretary Wolfgang Kaleck.

"That a criminal State representative should benefit from impunity is
always unacceptable. Because the USA is the super power of the
beginning of this century and, above all, because it is a democracy,
the impunity of Donald Rumsfeld is even more insufferable than that
of a Hissène Habré or a Radovan Karadzic", underlined Jean-Pierre
Dubois, LDH President.

The criminal complaint states that because of the failure of
authorities in the United States and Iraq to launch any independent
investigation into the responsibility of Rumsfeld and other
high-level U.S. officials for torture despite a documented paper
trail and government memos implicating them in direct as well as
command responsibility for torture – and because the U.S. has refused
to join the International Criminal Court – it is the legal obligation
of states such as France to take up the case.

In this case, charges are brought under the 1984 Convention against
Torture, ratified by both the United States and France, which has
been used in France in previous torture cases.

French courts therefore have an obligation under the Convention
against Torture to prosecute individuals responsible for acts of
torture if they are present on French territory (1). This will be the
only case filed while he is in the country, which makes the
obligations to investigate and prosecute under international law
extremely strong.

Rumsfeld's presence on French territory gives French courts
jurisdiction to prosecute him for having ordered and authorized
torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees in
Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere.

In addition, having resigned from his position of U.S. Secretary of
Defense a year ago, Rumsfeld can no longer try to claim immunity as a
head of state or government official. Nor can he claim immunity as
former state official, as international law does not recognize such
immunity in the case of international crimes including the crime of torture.

Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, former commander
of Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run prisons in Iraq, submitted written
testimony to the Paris Prosecutor for the plaintiffs' case on
Rumsfeld's responsibility for the abuse of detainees.

This is the fifth time Rumsfeld has been charged with direct
involvement in torture stemming from his role in the Bush
administration's program of torture post-9/11.

Two previous criminal complaints were filed in Germany under its
universal jurisdiction statute, which allows Germany to prosecute
serious international crimes regardless of where they occurred or the
nationality of the perpetrators or victims. One case was filed in
fall 2004 by CCR, FIDH, and Berlin attorney Wolfgang Kaleck; that
case was dismissed in February 2005 in response to official pressure
from the U.S., in particular from the Pentagon.

The second case was filed in fall 2006 by the same groups as well as
dozens of national and international human rights groups, Nobel Peace
Prize winners and the United Nations former Special Rapporteur on
Torture. The 2006 complaint was presented on behalf of 12 Iraqi
citizens who had been held and abused in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq
and one Saudi citizen still held at Guantánamo. This case was
dismissed in April 2007, and an appeal will be filed against this
decision next week.

Two other cases were filed against Rumsfeld in Argentina in 2005 and
in Sweden in 2007.

The complaint and the documents attached are available on FIDH Website :
http://www.fidh.org/spip.php?article4831
----------
Press contact : Karine Appy + 33 1 43 55 14 12 / + 33 1 43 55 25 18 /
+ 33 6 68 42 93 47
----------
(1) See articles 689 para 1 and 2 of the french Code of Criminal Procedure :
- Article 689-1)
In accordance with the international Conventions quoted in the
following articles, a person guilty of committing any of the offences
listed by these provisions outside the territory of the Republic and
who happens to be in France may be prosecuted and tried by French
courts. The provisions of the present article apply to attempts to
commit these offences, in every case where attempt is punishable.
- Article 689-2
For the implementation of the Convention against Torture and
other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted in
New York on 10th December 1984, any person guilty of torture in the
sense of article 1 of the Convention may be prosecuted and tried in
accordance with the provisions of article 689-1.

Waiting for the Guards...

10/10/2007 — 0 comment(s)
A new film from Amnesty International: