The Age of Barbarism Lite
By Karen J Greenberg
Asia Times
Sometimes a little stroll through history can have its uses. Take, as an example, the continuing debate over torture in post-9/11 America. Last week, Stephen Bradbury, the head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, testified before the House Judiciary Committee about waterboarding. In defending its use, Bradbury took a deep dive into the past. He claimed that the CIA's waterboarding of at least three of its prisoners bore "no resemblance" to what torturers in the Spanish Inquisition had done when they used what was then called "the Water Torture".
As part of his defense of the techniques used by the Bush administration to gain information, Bradbury went out of his way to play the historian, claiming that the water torture of yore differed from today's American-style version in crucial ways. The waterboarding employed by interrogators during the infamous Spanish Inquisition, he insisted, "involved the forced consumption of a mass amount of water". This led, he claimed, to the "lungs filling with water" to the point of "agony and death".
The CIA, on the other hand, employed "strict time limits", "safeguards", and "restrictions", making it a far more controlled technique. As he put it: "Something can be quite distressing or uncomfortable, even frightening, [but] if it doesn't involve severe physical pain, and it doesn't last very long, it may not constitute severe physical suffering" - and so would not qualify as torture. Bradbury summed up his historical case this way: "There's been a lot of discussion in the public about historical uses of waterboarding", but the "only thing in common is the use of water".
(Continued here.)
Asia Times
Sometimes a little stroll through history can have its uses. Take, as an example, the continuing debate over torture in post-9/11 America. Last week, Stephen Bradbury, the head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, testified before the House Judiciary Committee about waterboarding. In defending its use, Bradbury took a deep dive into the past. He claimed that the CIA's waterboarding of at least three of its prisoners bore "no resemblance" to what torturers in the Spanish Inquisition had done when they used what was then called "the Water Torture".
As part of his defense of the techniques used by the Bush administration to gain information, Bradbury went out of his way to play the historian, claiming that the water torture of yore differed from today's American-style version in crucial ways. The waterboarding employed by interrogators during the infamous Spanish Inquisition, he insisted, "involved the forced consumption of a mass amount of water". This led, he claimed, to the "lungs filling with water" to the point of "agony and death".
The CIA, on the other hand, employed "strict time limits", "safeguards", and "restrictions", making it a far more controlled technique. As he put it: "Something can be quite distressing or uncomfortable, even frightening, [but] if it doesn't involve severe physical pain, and it doesn't last very long, it may not constitute severe physical suffering" - and so would not qualify as torture. Bradbury summed up his historical case this way: "There's been a lot of discussion in the public about historical uses of waterboarding", but the "only thing in common is the use of water".
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home