Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Emmett Tyrrell :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Guantanamo Fourteen
by Emmett Tyrrell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

WASHINGTON -- A dozen or so representatives from the International Committee of the Red Cross are headed for our military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and frankly I am concerned for their comfort and possibly even their health. They plan to meet with detainees there, specifically the 14 terrorists who have been held in recent years at secret CIA facilities abroad. After those meetings will the members of the Red Cross delegation have access to showers, baths and possibly a sauna? I hope so.

James Taranto, the eminent editor of the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com has recently returned, and he reports that meetings with the detainees can be unpleasant. They comprise a rowdy lot. When the spirit moves them, they have been known to heave bodily fluids at those who irritate them, even bodily excreta. Also, according to Taranto, they devise weapons from otherwise harmless household devices such as springs pulled out of spring-operated faucets. These they might turn into needles for jabbing a jailer's eyes or stilettos for sticking him in an artery. Incidentally, by the word "spirit," I intended no religious import. In English it is just a catchphrase. If I have offended anyone, I apologize. If that is not enough send me a virgin.

Taranto reports that the detainees "enjoy a panoply of procedural protections," even after they hold a riot, attack guards or commit suicide, which he astutely points out is only doing in Guantanamo what they might otherwise do on the battlefield or on a crowded street. They regularly appear before Combatant Status Review Boards for an evaluation as to whether they were enemy combatants or just some unfortunate blokes who happened to be on a battlefield at the wrong time or carrying a grenade on a hunting trip when some paranoid official stopped them on the street. They also get to appear before Administrative Review Boards, which are somewhat like parole boards here at home. Three hundred and fifteen of Guantanamo's detainees have been released from American custody through these procedures, but unfortunately a dozen or more have ended up back on the battlefield. One hopes they do not run afoul of the authorities once again.

What kinds of questions will the members of the Red Cross delegation ask the detainees? After reading Taranto's report I would suggest this one: "What do you get when you mix feces with urine and soapy water?" The answer is a slick floor that will assist you in ambushing unsuspecting American jailers rushing into a cellblock to save a detainee from suicide. The detainees are regularly receiving medical and dental attention and psychiatric evaluations. One might ask them if they deem such services a profanation of their religious beliefs. Certainly the presence of Western psychiatrists could be construed as humiliating to these proud savages, if not an outright insult to their mullahs.

Reportedly, one of the 14 terrorists from those secret CIA hoosegows with whom the Red Cross will confer is Khalid Sheik Mohammed, reputedly the mastermind of the 9/11 atrocities. He apparently has had a rough time. He allegedly underwent what is called "aggressive interrogation." That includes such exactions as sleep deprivation, exposure to temperature extremes and exposure to loud rock and roll. It could have been worse. He could have been exposed to loud performances of Mozart's 41st Symphony or Beethoven's Missa Solemnis. He might even like rock and roll.

One form of aggressive interrogation that he apparently did not like was "waterboarding." The delegation from the Red Cross will want to ask him if was "waterboarding" that made him crack and divulge the names of other killers. Water boarding is not to be confused with skateboarding, which is infinitely more dangerous, causing sprained ankles and broken bones. But waterboarding is apparently now being ruled out even by our government as a form of interrogation.

Perhaps our government will replace waterboarding with skateboarding so long as it does not cause discomfort to captured terrorists. After all American teenagers engage in it freely; and the Sheik, or whatever he is called, might actually enjoy skateboarding. Surely members of this Red Cross delegation will want to leave Guantanamo a nicer place than when they arrived. Improving the camp's recreational facilities would be a start. Being able to point to a camp where detainees skateboard gaily through loops and over barrels, their baseball hats turned backward, wind whistling past them, would be an achievement of which the Red Cross could be proud.

If all of the above sounds absurd, well, it is. So is the question of how we have been handling these monstrous enemy combatants. They have no sense of honor or restraint and would use any available instrument to kill us, the greater the toll the better. If aggressive interrogation has prevented further 9/11s, no practice thus far revealed is beyond the pale.

The detainees at Guantanamo represent the steady approach of barbarism. Stop it now.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator and co-author of Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Emmett Tyrrell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
A more temperate response ...
Shrinque -
Although your academic attainment should indicate otherwise, you identify yourself as someone who refuses to acknowledge inconvenient facts. In your last post you obstinately chant: “There was no torture” of detainees in American military prisons. In response I recounted a number of cases of torture; but I didn’t provide references. Considering the level of denial among you and others on this site, this obviously won’t do. I repair the omission here.

Publication of the initial series of photographs from Abu Ghraib prison in the New Yorker Magazine elicited expressions of condemnation and concern from both Democratic and Republican officials. (The Washington Times - http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040510-122647-7274r.htm ) Reports of further images, included American soldiers beating a prisoner into unconsciousness, raping a female detainee, and videotaping Iraqi guards raping young boys.” These prompted many Congressmen to call for full disclosure. “I want to get it all out on the table," Senator Lindsey Graham told NBC's Meet the Press. However these demands were not universal. John Warner, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee predicted that some evidence would not be made public, because it was “classified.” It’s hard to imagine any strictly military secrets that might be revealed by such disclosure, so the only plausible reasons for secrecy are concern over adverse political consequences for Bush and Republicans and fear of reprisals against Americans in the middle east.

This latter possibility was soon confirmed. Within days of release of the Abu Ghraib photographs a videotape appeared showing the decapitation of kidnapped journalist Nicholas Berg ostensibly in retaliation for the abuses occurring in the American prison. Naturally it didn’t take long for right wing apologists to dismiss this link. Writing in the National Review Online, Erick Stakelbeck declares:

“Such a strategy will play right into the hands of the Blame America First crowd in the United States and abroad, who never hesitate to label any misfortune that befalls the U.S. as just punishment for its own past transgressions. The initial instinct among such people, when confronted with a horrific incident like Nicholas Berg's death, is to cut and run, rather than stand and fight.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/stakelbeck200405120831.asp


This infantile “He hit me first!” attitude has now become the accepted conventional wisdom among neo-conservative apologists and unfortunately in the Bush administration, thus virtually guaranteeing the continuation or escalation of cycles of atrocities on both sides.

John Warner’s other prediction also came true. The additional photographs and videotapes have never been released, allowing Pentagon spokesmen and George Bush to deny evidence of widespread violations of human rights. “There is no evidence of systematic abuse in this system at all," according to Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

However, their claims are contradicted by published statements of Republican officials and Congressmen who had seen the visual evidence and read official Pentagon reports. Donald Rumsfeld himself admitted that the behavior shown was "blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.” According to Senator Graham the military reports describe “rape and murder.” He goes on to say, “This is about system failure. This is about felony offenses.”

Abu Ghraib isn’t the only place where torture and murder has taken place. Another site implicated in official military investigations is Bagram AFB in Afghanistan. As described in an article in the New York Times, at least two innocent detainees were tortured to death by American military interrogators stationed at Bagram. One of these, Dilawar, was described in my previous post. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?ex=1274241600&en=4579c146cb14cfd6&ei=5088.

Other deaths associated with torture are described in an article in USA Today:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-05-23-death-probe_x.htm

1- Abdul Jaleel, 46, who died Jan. 9, 2004, at Forward Operating Base Rifles near Al Asad, Iraq. He died of "blunt force injuries and asphyxia."
2- Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush, a former commander of Saddam Hussein's air defenses, who died Nov. 26, 2003, during interrogation at Qaim, Iraq. His death may have involved a CIA officer who is an interrogator. Doctors attributed his death to "asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression."
3- Manadel Al-Jamadi, who was being held at Abu Ghraib, the Iraqi prison in which the well-known abuse of prisoners took place. He died Nov. 4, 2003, of "blunt force injuries complicated by compromised respiration," doctors said. Two CIA personnel, an officer and a contract translator, were present when he died. The agency and Justice Department are investigating
4- Dilar Dababa, who was being held near Baghdad. He died June 13, 2003, of what doctors determined was a head injury.
5- Mullah Habibullah, about 28, an Afghan held at Bagram, who died Dec. 3, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries to the legs."
6- Abdul Wahid, who died Nov. 6, 2003, in Helmand province, Afghanistan. His death is attributed to multiple blunt force injuries which were complicated by a muscle condition.

Even when the circumstances of these deaths aren’t as clear as they were in the case of the unfortunate Dilawar, common factors in these deaths are “blunt force” and “asphyxiation”, which are frequent concomitants of torture. I gathered these descriptions in ten minutes on the internet. Had I spent twenty minutes, I could have found twice as many. If I’d used reports by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, I could have reproduced scores of reports of torture and murder committed in U.S. detention facilities. However, in deference to your presumed rejection of information provided by such widely respected organizations, I restricted myself to main-stream media.

It’s not unreasonable to suggest that, if this much torture has come to light even in the absence of large-scale Congressional hearings, many more instances remain undiscovered, especially in the recently confirmed secret American prisons scattered around the world.

Are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and other top civilian leaders responsible for these crimes? According to the principle enunciated at Nuremburg, leaders are responsible for war crimes committed as a result of their policies, even if there was no direct involvement. Commenting on these events last year, retired U.S. Army Colonel Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell, stated that “there’s no question” that torture had occurred in U.S. detention facilities and that “we may be still doing it.” Wilkerson went on to say,
"There's no question in my mind where the philosophical guidance and the flexibility in order to do so originated -- in the vice president of the United States' office. His implementer in this case was Donald Rumsfeld and the Defense Department." http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/20/torture/

The efforts by White House lawyers, including Alberto Gonzales and John Woo, to discredit or reinterpret the Geneva Conventions have been amply described (see, for example, the article “The Roots of Torture” in Newsweek - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4989481/ ) Combined with Bush’s recent push to obtain legitimization of torture from Congress, these leave little doubt that the policy of using torture originates in the White House, in fact, in the Oval Office.

So, Doc, only one question remains in my estimation. Are you honest enough to admit that you were wrong (or perhaps merely misinformed) about the use of torture in U.S. detention centers; or are you such a mindless partisan that you will deny what is incontrovertible in your zeal to defend George Bush? I’m giving you the benefit of doubt. The rest is up to you.

Post note: There is an alternative. You can simply disappear without comment. That was the method chosen by “Liberty Promoter” in another thread (Wisdom and judgment deficiency by Cal Thomas, Tuesday, September 19, 2006) LP challenged me to demonstrate that George Bush had lied (an absurdly easy task, although LP didn’t seem to realize this.) When I complied, LP vanished. In fact, no one took it upon himself to respond. It was a telling experience.

Wrong.
Like most of the people who post on this site, you derive your knowledge of the world from a narrow collection of partisan sources. As a result you often don't know what you're talking about. I asked you, if you'd read the Geneva Conventions. Obviously you decided not to. The administration and its collection of pet lawyers (like Alberto Gonzales and the deplorable John Yoo) have tried to bend international, as well as domestic law to suit themselves, for example by inventing the category of “unlawful combatant” that has no prior standing in international law. It’s merely a term they’ve adapted to serve their own ends, but it’s a thin reed to stand on.

The Third Geneva Convention states the following:

-- "Part I
General Provisions
Art 5.
Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal." --

Regarding Al Queda fighters, the situation isn’t at all clear cut. While many of those fighters don’t wear conventional uniforms, the Geneva Convention does not actually specify this. Instead the text is as follows:

-- “Prisoners of war … are persons belonging to one of the following categories … members of … organized resistance movements [who]
a) [Are] commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) [Have] a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) [Carry] arms openly;
(d) [Conduct] their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war." --

The Al Queda fighters in Afghanistan in particular could arguably make a case for each of the above characteristics, cerainly enough to justify an appeal to a “competent tribunal.” Yet the Bush administration ordered that hundreds of these individuals, as well as thousands of muslim men who were not even captured on the battlefield, should be held indefinitely and incommunicado without judicial recourse.

When the administration was finally forced by the Supreme Court to provide legal review for the detainees, it did so using contrived and inadequate “kangraroo” courts that the high court also struck down.

In addition, there’s a great deal more to the question of what protections these detainees are due. Never mentioned by Bush and his supporters is the so called “Fourth Geneva Convention”, properly known as the "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol 1)" which dates from 1977.

Article 75. of this Protocol states:

--"Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents ... " --

The Protocol goes on to specify torture and other acts which are prohibited – and which the Bush administration has clearly condoned.

So, in other words, even if detainees don’t fit the terms of the Third Geneva Convention, they are still protected from gross abuses of human rights by the Fourth.

Bush defenders will quickly point out that the United States has never signed the Fourth Protocol. Nevertheless, American officials have consistently stated that the United States regards the Protocal as a legitimate principle of international law. Speaking in February, 2006, State Department Legal Advisor John Bellinger said, "Article 75 of Geneva Protocol I does set a generally minimum standard for people who do not benefit from other provisions of the Geneva Convention, and the U.S. has historically said that we think that is customary international law."

As to whether torture of detainees has occurred, there’s simply no question about this, no matter how vehemently you deny it. The Bush administration has tried to redefine torture as only those acts which produce grave bodily injury, organ failiure, or death. This is clearly a self-serving attempt to clear the way for more sophisticated forms of torture which do not produce permanent physiological harm. As a physician you more than most people should recognize the hypocrisy of this. Water boarding (mock drowning) uses the most urgent physical drive that animals can experience to produce horrible suffering. The distress is so grave, in fact, that according to most accounts few individuals can withstand it for more than a few seconds. The Fox pundits like to refer to this as “scaring” its victims. You should know better.
The same goes for prolonged stress positions (Have you ever seen the medieval torture device known as the “Iron Maiden”? That was nothing more than an unusually cruel form of stress positioning.), sleep deprivation (As you know, this can produce serious psychological and even physical harm.) and sensory deprivation. There are in addition, well documented accounts of detainees who have been shackled and exposed to severe cold, while being periodically drenched with water. Some of them have died. A recent military court conviction was based upon the death of a detainee who was wrapped in a sleeping bag and suffocated to death.
Photographs from Abu Ghraib document numerous examples of torture – and I’m not referring to mere humiliation or insult – even though these are also specifically forbidden. The most famous photograph so far made public shows a hooded man standing on a podium with electrodes attached to his fingers, toes, and genitals. Not only is this kind of electrical stimulation a clear form of torture, it is one that had to have been taught to the low ranking ‘bad apples’ who performed it by intelligence operatives, since it was a characteristic form of torture used during the Vietnam War. Those young GIs didn’t think it up themselves! They're just serving the time for it, rather than the high officials who made it happen.
There are official accounts of many individual atrocities, such as the arab taxi driver (an innocent civilian who was sold to the American forces by an Afghan warlord) who was chained to the ceiling of his cell by his wrists for two weeks, during which time his legs were so badly beaten that, had he lived, they would have required amputation (this according to the army pathologist who did the post mortem.) However, if you still maintain by this time that torture has not occurred in American custody, you’ve clearly closed your mind to anything other than what you’ve been told to believe. I understand that some German physicians cooperated with the Nazis by helping to keep prisoners alive for prolonged periods of time under torture. If you’re so comfortable with what’s being done in Bush’s prison system, perhaps you should volunteer to help out!

By the way, I checked. The Republican bill that Bush is promoting does indeed provide retroactive immunity for agents who have violated the Geneva Conventions. Look it up. And why are they so eager to do this? Because most of the things I've pointed out here constitute war crimes: torture, illegal imprisonment, murder of prisoners ... and Bush and his accomplices were directly complicit in bringing these things about.

Don't like hearing that? Tough! You and your compatriots can foam and rage all you like. I’ll match your indignation any day of the week. I served my country in the navy during the Vietnam War and I’ve been a commited patriot my whole life. George Bush and his supporters are dragging this country’s honor through the mud by defying both law and human decency with their torture, secret prisons, violations of civil rights, and grotesque lies. Events in Iraq even now show what a collosal human disaster they’ve created through their arrogance and stupidity. You can try to lay the blame off on those who criticize Bush, but the truth is rapidly becoming unavoidable. He made this mess himself, and if I and the growing number of people who feel as I do have anything to say about it, he'll be held accountable for it. You were unable to cite a shred of evidence that George Washington or any of the heroes of the Revolution would have stooped to the kinds of actions that you so vehemently support. I’ll say it again: Those brave men would have looked on the lot of you with pity and contempt for what you’re trying to do to the republic they risked their lives to create.

You should be ashamed.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.