Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
What part of prohibiting enhanced interrogation techniques (that Bush approved), closing CIA black prisons (that Bush authorized) and ending rendition to countries that torture their citizens (that Bush allowed) dont you understand?
|
The Bush administration sought to clarify the issue of lawful enhanced interrogation and torture. Many have come to the conclusion that water boarding is and should legally be considered torture.
The Bush administration operated within the law. However, Obama, said the law was violated - but failed to act on what he and his Justice Department considered illegal. His failure to act, defacto, validates what Bush did.
What is worse the issue of defining what is and what is not torture has not been clearly defined under Obama. The "Fear-up" provision in the Army Field Manual is a bit vague, and allows for the use of exploiting fear, real or imagined. Perhaps, introducing the fear of drowning fits into that, what do you think?
{added} I should not have assumed that people who read this actually read the Army Field Manual. I did a Google search and came across an interesting article on the subject of torture and the Manual. It also quoted the "Fear-up" provision in the manual. Interested people may want to read the article and the Manual.
Quote:
|
In the fear-up approach, the HUMINT [human intelligence] collector identifies a pre-existing fear or creates a fear within the source. He then links the elimination or reduction of the fear to cooperation on the part of the source. … The HUMINT collector should also be extremely careful that he does not create so much fear that the source becomes unresponsive. (pp. 8-10)
|
http://www.alternet.org/rights/11780...l_does/?page=1