The Tortured Party
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 12-12-2008 - 11:15pm |
Now that he's got nothing to lose by dropping the pandering, McCain issued a joint report just that found that Rumsfeld was right in the middle of authorizing the torture:
"Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld Approves Aggressive Techniques (U)
(U) With respect to GTMO’s October 11, 2002 request to use aggressive interrogation
techniques, Mr. Haynes said that “there was a sense by the DoD Leadership that this decision
was taking too long” and that Secretary Rumsfeld told his senior advisors “I need a
recommendation.” On November 27, 2002, the Secretary got one. Notwithstanding the serious
legal concerns raised by the military services, Mr. Haynes sent a one page memo to the
Secretary, recommending that he approve all but three of the eighteen techniques in the GTMO
request. Techniques such as stress positions, removal of clothing, use of phobias (such as fear of
dogs), and deprivation of light and auditory stimuli were all recommended for approval.
(U) Mr. Haynes’s memo indicated that he had discussed the issue with Deputy Secretary
of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, and General
Myers and that he believed they concurred in his recommendation. When asked what he relied
on to make his recommendation that the aggressive techniques be approved, the only written
legal opinion Mr. Haynes cited was Lieutenant Colonel Beaver’s legal analysis, which senior
military lawyers had considered “legally insufficient” and “woefully inadequate,” and which
LTC Beaver herself had expected would be supplemented with a review by persons with greater
experience than her own.
(U) On December 2, 2002, Secretary Rumsfeld signed Mr. Haynes’s recommendation,
adding a handwritten note that referred to limits proposed in the memo on the use of stress
positions: “I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?”
(U) SERE school techniques are designed to simulate abusive tactics used by our
enemies. There are fundamental differences between a SERE school exercise and a real world
interrogation. At SERE school, students are subject to an extensive medical and psychological
pre-screening prior to being subjected to physical and psychological pressures. The schools
impose strict limits on the frequency, duration, and/or intensity of certain techniques.
Psychologists are present throughout SERE training to intervene should the need arise and to
help students cope with associated stress. And SERE school is voluntary; students are even
given a special phrase they can use to immediately stop the techniques from being used against
them.
(U) Neither those differences, nor the serious legal concerns that had been registered,
stopped the Secretary of Defense from approving the use of the aggressive techniques against
detainees. Moreover, Secretary Rumsfeld authorized the techniques without apparently
providing any written guidance as to how they should be administered. "
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2008/Detainees.121108.pdf
What a surprise! There will be a lot more on this. If we don't hold those who broke the law accountable, the rampant rate of lawbreaking in the Republican Party will not slow down in the slightest. It will also be a good message to Democrats not to make the same mistakes.

Pages
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
Not to cause a problem but in actuality a dog suspected of having rabies is killed in order to preform the test.
"The only way to be 100% sure that an animal is rabid is to perform a direct fluorescent antibody test (dFA) on the brain tissue, which requires that the animal be euthanized. This is the most rapid and reliable test for rabies and it has been used for more than 40 years."
Thanks for the information. Shoots my metaphor to hell in a hand basket but facts matter more than metaphors!
I would imagine too that dogs would be observed for a time to verify that signs of rabies manifested themselves.
Humans have to be treated BEFORE they show symptoms - otherwise the disease is fatal. Here is more info for you:
<
Advertising Disclaimer
If a stray or unvaccinated cat, dog, or other animal bites a person, the animal should be immediately euthanized and submitted for rabies testing. Unvaccinated people should receive postexposure treatment within 48 hours. Each year in the United States, 40,000 people receive postexposure treatment, which involves immediate cleansing of the wound and injection of human rabies immune globulin into the wound site and one other site (e.g., the buttocks). At the same time, a series of five injections of vaccine are administered. The local public health official should also be notified. >>
We have an outbreak of rabies here this summer - some foxes were attacking day campers so we were all a little jittery about stray animals. Usually they go ahead and euthanize it if it is a stray.
>>> According to our Administration, they are our friend.
Britain is a "friend"...China is more like the distasteful guy you do business with but always keep a keen eye on.
>>> We love "free trade" with this country.
Trade builds allies...and it's probably a good idea to have a burgeoning economic superpower with billions of citizens as an ally...and maybe "friend" some day.
>>> But, is it really free trade or dictatorial repressed costs? If it is the latter, it will hurt the regular good old people of their country and our country but it is plenty good for transnational companies. Just go and ask Walmart.
I'm sure that millions of Chinese people working in factories making cheap goods for America would much rather be on the dole or starving. Just go and ask the people who CHOOSE to work at WalMart.
>>> Now remember the line with this Admin. is we support democracy, human rights and respect for international law. Yet, we continue to support and do lots of business with countries that have repressive regimes like China.
We do support democracy, human rights and respect for international law. I don't see how that is inconsistent with trading with China. Trade is the best hope for things in China to change.
>>> Also, do we really support the right of habeas corpus? That all depends if you believe international law and international relations are inseparable.
I thought the left wasn't interested in nation building.
>>> Actually, never said it was fine if people "don't embrace democracy," but if that's not what they want, I guess it is.
When you said..."That is what Iraq is today. I don't know why we're there. To spread democracy? You can't make people embrace democracy."...it sounded as if democracy in Iraq wasn't a significant issue for you.
>>> We cannot make them do it, though. We can show them, but at this point in Iraq with its own brand of corruption internally and having to deal with the external terrorist groups now in the country, and having us there occupying the land, and the people having to just figure out how to stay alive for another day, I don't know how we can do it.
I think you have a somewhat mistaken impression of everyday life in Iraq. People aren't "struggling to survive another day," many, if not most, are living relatively normal lives, and how free, or oppressed those lives are, probably matter. Personally, I can't imagine offering someone "freedom" and having them refuse. It may be a culture shock to many, but it's a worthwhile culture shock in the end.
>>> If you have any suggestions, please send them on to those who are in charge. They seem to be having some difficulty with the premise also.
I don't think so. It looks like what they're doing is working.
>>> And it shouldn't just be the "libs lamenting the plight of the Iraqi women." As an unintended offshoot of getting rid of SH, murderer that he was, we pushed them back about 50 years.
I'm not really going to shed too many tears because women have to cover up when they go out...but if it's an issue for them, then they should organize and fight to turn things around. Women hold a LOT of power.
>>> It's to be hoped that they will rise to the occasion, embrace democracy, have their own version of constitutional rights and privileges, but they will have to eventually do that on their own because eventually we will leave there.
Heck, a guy threw a shoe at the President and wasn't killed...looks like things are off to a good start.
Regardless of a general's opinion, I provided you with actual facts concerning the number of military personnel. The general might be asking for something very specific, but to present his assessment, or wish list, as if we didn't have enough military personnel to carry out missions is simply ridiculous. Maybe the general should take steps to get the multitudes of active servicemen already enlisted into what he would consider "battle ready" status.
Pages