The US does not torture

New rules to misrule

I would not know, but I would leave this to the great legal minds and dons that visit my blog, suppose that is a branch of legal jurisprudence that is called military law.

This is because outlawed outpost of Guantanamo Bay has presented a Military Commissions manual to be used for trying detainees in Camp Delta, the contents of which appear to satisfy elements of civil law and in others indicate a departure from standard and accepted legal practices where the threshold of evidence is as low as hear-say.

The evidence is awash with classified monikers that the patchwork of evidence the defence would have to work with would leave enough holds to make every trial unacceptably loaded against the accused bringing to close to just better than a kangaroo court.

Now, I am no legal expert, the views might differ, no so much by the letter of the law but by political persuasion where the right would contend that these provisions are the best that can be offered with regards to the sensitivity of the issues at hand and the left would contend that premise of innocence until tried and proven guilty is lost.

Some military lawyers already have misgivings about this manual which in the circumstances might have its progeny with the military junta of Myanmar, OK! That was a bit given to histrionics, my point is, and justice should not only be done, it should verifiably be seen to be done properly.

US does not torture

The other part of the evidence that would be most interesting to every civil and human rights activist is the implication that.

+ Some evidence might have been obtained under torture

+ Some evidence was obtained by coercion and is admissible as long as it was obtained before December 2005

The question then is, have these prisoners been tortured? They most certainly have, the spectacle of Abu Ghraib was an excerpt of the “Practical Guide to Obtaining Information” introduced by the commandant of Guantanamo Bay.

As for coercion, we can presume dunking which is the deliberate deprivation of air by pushing the full face into a liquid was not torture till at least December 2005 – avoiding gruesome detail – an activity that gets a full thumbs-up from vice-President Cheney, sorry, the less aggressive word is “water-boarding”, you would be forgiven for thinking it was as hip as skate-boarding.

Yes, “water-boarding” is a variant of dunking where rather than push the face into a liquid, facing upward and the body inclined with the head at the lower point, the gardener simulates a torrent of rain over the face that the gag-reflex creates a drowning sensation as the person almost enters the delirium of death.

However, we must hear the President out, “We do not torture”, he protests, they only use vital tools of elevated persuasion – I will not be good for politics, not with my mastery of semantics.

It would appear my concept of torture is hardly coercion in the eyes of those at the forefront of the war on terror in America. Judge for yourself, as we have been told, the US does not torture.

An admission in remission

The end does not justify the means

When President Bush yesterday admitted to the existence of CIA secret prisons along with the consideration that information obtained from certain of the imprisoned has since prevented terrorism attacks, I thought I could see in the background Niccolò Machiavelli being introduced as Press Secretary (Minister of Propaganda would be too 1930s to contemplate.).

The thought that hardened terrorists would voluntarily divulge information to Americans about plans they might have painstakingly arranged to bring ill to America does take a bit of imagination.

The Gitmo Workbook

In fact, the Abu Ghraib abuse which appeared routine as a means of warped entertainment and in reality blatant torture appears to have come of the Guantanamo Bay workbook since the man-in-charge there was brought in to toughen up the regime at Abu Ghraib.

Somehow, we just have found it difficult to believe protestations of Americans about not torturing their prisoners; caught in the web of the broad terror principle and this Machiavellian notion that subscribes to extraordinary rendition, the existence of Guantanamo Bay, the military tribunals and the unwarranted eavesdropping on Americans.

Immoral grounds

One by one, each of these has been completely discredited if not declared illegal, but we have torturously drawn water from stone as this admission now comes into the light of day.

One more admission is required, by whose authority was the CIA agents shopped to the press?

In all, everything that allows America to maintain the high moral ground in this war on terror has been lost to hubris and bluster, the former is the delusional confidence in the projection of American power and the other can easily be championed by Donald Rumsfeld.

Where truly we have been saved from some terrorist attack we are grateful for those mercies, however using the fear of terror to justify actions and activities that would not stand the scrutiny of basic terms of justice and fairness whilst we are continually stripped of our liberties for the sake of our supposed safety is nasty, unconscionable and Machiavellian – the end will never justify the means.

We have become our own terrorists

Why? Because we become the terrorists we are trying to fight, we deny ourselves the power of our democracies just as the terrorists would have liked to do and our so-called freedoms are rolled back into the bondage of a police state, worse than where those terrorists came from.

As it stands, the only leadership quality America now serves is in having funds and having guns, it is left to others to play the deft hand of real diplomacy in the New World Order.