"John De Gennaro" <rhadts1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:txgCc.10802$bs4.2438@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> This story was reprinted 641 times in the U.S. and more than 1,000 times
> world wide. Source http://www.marumu****.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm
>
> Rumsfeld OK'd harsh treatment of suspects in U.S. war on terror
you don't think that's news-worthy? i would think suppressing it would
have
shown a bias.
>
>
>
> USA TODAY
> June 23, 2004
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----
> WA****NGTON -- In an extraordinary disclosure of classified material, the
> Bush administration released 258 pages of internal do***ents Tuesday
that
> ****tray harsh interrogation techniques -- including stripping terror
> suspects and threatening them with dogs -- as a necessary response to
> threats from al-Qaida terrorists.
>
> The release of lists of interrogation techniques and other do***ents
> previously kept secret even from U.S. allies was a bid by the
administration
> to quiet harsh criticism over its handling of prisoners in the war on
terror
> and the conflict in Iraq.
>
> Though some of the memos argued that Bush had the right to approve
torture,
> the administration said it had never done so, and pointed to techniques
it
> said fell far short of torture. In a separate press briefing Tuesday,
the
> Justice Department backed away from a memo written in 2002 that appeared
to
> justify the use of torture in the war on terror. That memo argued that
the
> president's wartime powers superseded anti-torture laws and treaties.
>
> Bush made his most explicit comments yet about the issue Tuesday: "We do
not
> condone torture. I have never ordered torture. I will never order
torture,"
> Bush said.
>
> The do***ents reveal Bush, senior administration officials and
hard-pressed
> commanders in the field grappling with the need to extract information
about
> future terror attacks from suspects skilled at defeating many
interrogation
> techniques. In a Feb. 7, 2002, finding, Bush said the Sept. 11 terror
> attacks require "new thinking in the law of war."
>
> Bush said al-Qaida members and their Taliban allies in Afghanistan were
not
> covered by the protections of the Geneva Convention. But he ordered U.S.
> armed forces to treat them "humanely" anyway, and to observe Geneva
> Convention standards "to the extent appropriate and consistent with
military
> necessity."
>
> Just such a necessity arose months later when the first anniversary of
Sept.
> 11 brought new fears of terror attack. Intelligence officers at the U.S.
> prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, told their superiors that Mohamed
> al-Kahtani, believed to be the would-be 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11
plot,
> was withholding information about new attacks, Daniel Dell'Orto, the
> Pentagon's deputy general counsel told re****ters at a White House
briefing
> Tuesday.
>
> The alert set in motion a review that culminated with a Nov. 27, 2002,
> "action memo" in which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved
> interrogation techniques that included "removal of clothing" and
"inducing
> stress by use of detainee's fears (e.g. dogs)."
>
> Eventually, after military officers raised moral and legal concerns
about
> the techniques and the Pentagon conducted an internal review, Rumsfeld
> issued revised rules for Guantanamo in April 2003 that omitted the
stripping
> and use of dogs.
>
>
> --
> Let the name calling begin!!! (its all you libs have)
>
>
|
