Gonzales Defends Interrogation Methods

[sabra]

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/09/18/ap3024759.html

Gonzales Defends Interrogation Methods

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Monday defended the Bush administration's strategy for interrogating terror suspects, calling it legal and critical to "continue gathering information about our enemies."

In a speech, Gonzales said CIA interrogators lack guidance on how to comply with the international Geneva Conventions, saying the provisions banning "humiliating and degrading treatment" and "outrages upon personal dignity" are too vague.

"Such phrases standing alone mean different things to Americans," he said at a conference on citizenship. "Think of the differences in interpretation that will exist between differing legal systems and cultures of the nations of the world."

"Seeking this clarity is important to our efforts to continue gathering information about our enemies," Gonzales said. "In all that we do in the war on terror, we seek to promote the rule of law and protect freedom."

[Captain Hilts]

1. He vetted the executions in Texas for Bush. nt

[indepat]

13. Was it not a 100% success rate with nary a conviction being tainted in the

least?

[Captain Hilts]

15. That's correct. Sleeping lawyers, scant evidence be damned! nt

[tk2kewl]

2. If SCOTUS says its not, its not. What law school did this asshole go to?

:mad:

[katmondoo]

4. Did John Mitchel, the Attorney General under Nixon go to jail?

He did some nasty things for Nixon

[kurth]

5. Mitchell served 19 months in federal prison

before being released for medical reasons.

[Supersedeas]

23. Do you doubt that Gonzo is doing something filthy acts of PR on behalf of

the President. Gonzo is acting like he is WH counsel still, when will he assume his duties as the PEOPLE'S attorney.

[Avalux]

3. What the hell is he talking about?????

Such phrases mean different things to Americans? :wtf:

"humiliating and degrading treatment" and "outrages upon personal dignity" were placed in the Geneva Conventions and signed off on by 19 countries INCLUDING the United States.

The phrases aren't vague, they're broad. They're designed to give no wiggle room; if that section is specific, a country might say we can do this, but not that.

Bottom line "treat others the way you'd want to be treated". That's the gist of the Geneva Conventions and I don't think it can be any clearer.

Got stick your head in the toilet now Gonzo. You are an embarrassment.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. you have hit upon their real plan

They want specifis "Don't do this or this or that" so they can create and use option D.
That is all. They are soulless, evil, craven war criminals.

I just hope that we can use these same techniques on Alberto when he is charged with war crimes.

[Tellurian]

22. Gonzo knows he is #1 on the list as Bush's scapegoat

Can you hear Bush now..

Hey I did the Right thing, I asked for a legal opinion.
Gonzales said, "Thus And So!" "Not My Fault; I'm NOT a Lawyer."

What do you think I have an Atty Gen for?

<fill in your own scenario>

[Kagemusha]

9. That's what I've been saying and I agree 100% with your phrasing

No one had any doubt what this stuff meant before Gonzales and John Yoo. Or put another way, before there was a need to lawyer the Conventions because the US military wasn't doing this sort of thing before. ...CIA's probably a different matter altogether. Having said that, at some point you get past "combattant" rights to "human" rights.

Used to be we all knew what those meant, even if the high principles were not always adhered to. Now it's transparent lip service.

[hootinholler]

28. Ameican or not...

Maybe it's me, but being smeared in shit for days at a time is an outrageous assualt on personal dignity.

But ol' Gonzo boy has a duty to prosecute this does he not?

-Hoot

[Supersedeas]

35. vague broad and quaint -- and historically stable -- human rights is de-ev

evolving under this Administration

[ShortnFiery]

6. Here's your clarification Gonzo, you clueless putz!

It's call Field Manual 34-52 entitled (ta-da!)

Intelligence Interrogation :wow:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/policy/army/fm/fm34-52/

snip

PREFACE

This manual sets forth the basic principles of interrogation doctrine and establishes procedures and techniques applicable to Army intelligence interrogations, applies to the doctrine contained in FM 34-1, and follows operational procedures outlined in FM 100-5. It provides general guidance for commanders, staff officers, and other personnel in the use of interrogation elements of Army intelligence units. It outlines procedures for the handling of the sources of interrogations, the exploitation and processing of documents, and the reporting of intelligence gained through interrogation. It covers directing and supervising interrogation operations, conflict scenarios and their impact on interrogation operations, and peacetime interrogation operations.


Chapter 1
Interrogation and Interrogator

Interrogation is the art of questioning and examining a source to obtain the maximum amount of usable information. The goal of any interrogation is to obtain usable and reliable information, in a lawful manner and in the least amount of time, which meets intelligence requirements of any echelon of command. Sources may be civilian internees, insurgents, EPWs, defectors, refugees, displaced persons, and agents or suspected agents. A successful interrogation produces needed information which is timely, complete, clear, and accurate. An interrogation involves the interaction of two personalities: the source and the interrogator. Each contact between these two differs to some degree because of their individual characteristics and capabilities, and because the circumstances of each contact and the physical environment vary.

/snip

[lyonn]

8. Are you referring to the Gonzales that is bought and paid for?

He would be nowhere if he hadn't been picked up by The Texans in power during w's time as govenor. They know a yes man when they see one.

[Supersedeas]

37. the nation's attorney charged with protecting Civil Rights--needs clarity

Quaint, ain't it!!

[cboy4]

10. Hard to believe anyone could turn out to be more repulsive

than Ashcroft.

[Solly Mack]

11. Liar and here's why...important

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm

Please note the wording..."...Torture and other cruel..." - which means torture in and of itself is considered cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment and that other forms of "cruel...." exist in addition to torture...

so right off, we know torture is considered "outrages upon personal dignity"

Now the CAT defines torture as

"Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/h_cat39.htm (status of CAT)

And even IF America had not signed to the CAT, it is STILL accepted Customary Law. But the US DID sign...so the US acknowledged that it accepted the terms outlined and defined...furthermore...the Senate sent word to the UN that the CAT did not require additional legislation because it did not contradict the US Constitution and was in keeping with US laws already.


additional info:

DEFINITION OF TORTURE UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
COMPILATION

http://www.apt.ch/un/Torture%20Definition.doc

[MiniMe]

12. Lets hook up HIS testicles to electrodes and see what he has to tell us

We could get some very interesting answers.

Arrogant a-hole!

[coalition_unwilling]

24. No, let's smear him with menstrual blood and force his face

into his own feces, all while holding snarling dogs six inches from his face.

[0007]

33. .....or have Condi drag him around naked on a lease.

[indepat]

14. Surely most of the rest of the world see this for what it is: will home

folks ever?

[Supersedeas]

16. Definitive statement: It is legal (YET interrogators need guidance???)

[DoYouEverWonder]

17. They want to use torture

just for the sake of using torture. Because they like it. It gets them off. It makes them feel powerful.

This has nothing to do with preventing terrorism. This only creates more terrorism.

How much longer before they start to use the same arguments to justify torturing Americans?

[lyonn]

18. Isn't it sad that we are even questioning the meaning of torture?

For over 50 years people seemed to understand perfectly what the Geneva Convention said - now, this bunch running our country into the ground have the "ba*ls (Nerve, guts, etc.) to "want it clarified". Have we lost our minds?

[VegasWolf]

19. Good! Then he will be ready for his Hague defense! nt

[movonne]

20. Well, surprise, surprise...

[young_at_heart]

21. There is NOTHING he can say to make it right

The Bush Administration will be forever known as "The Torturers"!

[Supersedeas]

34. creating a loophole in the definition of torture makes it closer to right

*sarcasm alert*

[Felinity]

25. My point is in a related thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2832811&mesg_id=2834271

And yes, as above, who would have thought someone could be worse than Ashcroft?

[fooj]

26. Gonzo is going to FRY with the rest of the treasonous, rat bastards!

[texpatriot2004]

27. Amen to that Fooj! He's a sicko just like the rest of them may

he rot in hell.

[DeSwiss]

29. Well, I'd like to propose a Torture Bill amendment....

...why not just include the language: "terrorists and ALL members of the U.S. Government's Executive Branch," under those to whom such "interogation" tactics can legally be used.

That's surely open things up come January when the Dems are asking the questions. And an impeachment trial with water-boarding, and cattle prods in use would beat anything realty TV could throw out there....

:sarcasm:

[DreamTheaterFan]

30. Well of course he can defend it

He's never been tortured, and doesn't have the ability to empathize with the people he's torturing. None of them do. They can look us in the eye and say that isn't torture either, which just astounds me.

[fredtheman]

31. Freedom Fighters

I agree, these poor freedom fighters should be released, maybe given Hawaii vacations. And while we're at it, let's put Bush in jail!!!

[DreamTheaterFan]

32. *rolls eyes*

I sure you hope you aren't being sarcastic. I never said they should be released (if they are found guilty). I only said they shouldn't be tortured. NOBODY should be.

If you AREN'T being sarcastic... my bad... but the Hawiian vacation thing screams of sarcasm.

[Supersedeas]

36. Fact: innocent people have been tortured--it can not be defended

As if torturing innocents was similar to collateral damage or something...who are these turd husks?

[Ravy]

38. *JUDGES* make that determination, not a two-bit partisan lawyer(nt)