NYT Knows When to Call Torture, Torture, When it’s Not the U.S. Doing it

[Old Hank]

Firedoglake.com
By: akak Saturday May 2, 2009 3:03 pm

I missed the ABC report and video of a member of the Abu Dhabi ruling family torturing an Afghan grain merchant whom he thought had cheated him.
It's gruesome. According to the NYT description of the video, he

tortur(ed) the merchant with whips, cattle prods and a wooden plank with a protruding nail, and finally driving over him with an S.U.V.

Miraculously, the merchant survived. Given Yoo's clear definition that it's not torture if there isn't organ failure, why is the NYT not terming this as harsh/brutal interrogation tactics.

/snark

link: http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/5097

[No Elephants]

1. this past Sunday, George Steph referred to the "anti-terrorist measures" of the

Bush administration and the "enhanced interrogation techniques."

After I checked my Obfuscating Bullshit-to-English dictionary, I sent This Week an email, suggesting they shop for a journalistic ethic, just one.

Some member of Bushco, maybe Rumsfeld, objected to humiliation by the Arabs of American captives.

Sigh.