Sen Tom Harkin: Taking a stand on torture

[cal04]

Taking a stand on torture
by Senator Tom Harkin


The Washington Post recently editorialized on Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey and torture, in which the wise men of the Washington Post stated that Congress "should do something which, for all the rhetoric, they have so far declined to do: ban torture."

In fact, Congress has banned torture. Simply because this Administration believes it has the inherent authority to ignore the law and has consistently distorted the meaning of the word "torture" does not mean that Congress has not done so.

Congress has consistently made clear that torture is a violation of our highest values and is simply not permitted. Over fifty years ago, in 1955, the Senate ratified the Geneva Convention. Common Article 3 of that Convention expressly prohibits torture, as well as "cruel treatment." In 1990, the Senate ratified the Convention Against Torture, which obligated the United States to "take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction." Just last year, Congress adopted the Military Commissions Act, which expressly prohibited "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of prisoners.

Nor can there be any question that waterboarding – a horrific practice going back to the Spanish Inquisition and used in this Century by the Gestapo, the North Koreans and the Khmer Rouge – is prohibited. As John McCain has described it, it is a "very exquisite torture." Going back to the Spanish-American War, the U.S. military has brought charges against those who practice this terrible interrogation technique. In passing the Military Commissions Act, Congress made quite clear that interrogation techniques like waterboarding are expressly prohibited.

I am disappointed that the Post chose not to mention what is clear law, and I am troubled that, given this history, Judge Mukasey could not answer what is a simple question: is waterboarding torture? It is equally troubling that Judge Mukasey, in his answers to the Senate Judiciary Nor can there be any question that waterboarding – a horrific practice going back to the Spanish Inquisition – is prohibited. As John McCain has described it, it is a "very exquisite torture." Rear Adm. John Hutson, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, has stated that "other than, perhaps the rack and thumbscrews, water boarding is the most iconic example of torture in history," adding, "It has been repudiated for centuries."

Going back to the Spanish-American War, the U.S. military has brought charges against those who practice this terrible interrogation technique. In passing the Military Commissions Act, Congress made quite clear that interrogation techniques like waterboarding are expressly prohibited.

This issue is very personal for me. I have seen first hand the terrible damage to our reputation and our war efforts that result when we do not live up to our highest principles. In 1970, as a staff assistant to a committee in the House of Representatives, I traveled to Vietnam. There, I saw, and brought back photographs of the so-called tiger cages at Con Son Island, off the coast of Vietnam, where Viet Cong and some North Vietnamese prisoners, were held, incommunicado, tortured and killed, with the full knowledge, support, and sanction of the United States, all in clear violation of the Geneva Convention.

I saw then, and I am seeing today, the damage the use of torture does to our reputation. Practices that certainly rise to the level of torture, as well as the continued operation at the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, have hurt our ability to wage an effective fight against the terrorists who attacked us on September 11, 2001. They are used in our enemy's recruiting efforts and by those who wish harm to our brave soldiers.

Torture, including waterboarding, is illegal. Congress has said so, and I believe that Judge Mukasey knows it. It is cause of grave concern when he can not say so and this Administration continues to believe it can ignore the clear mandate of the law.

Regrettably, because this Administration has chosen to ignore the clear letter of current law, Congress must yet again reiterate that torture such as waterboarding is immoral, ineffective and most definitely illegal. That is why I support efforts to forbid the use of interrogation techniques not explicitly authorized in the army field manual -- including waterboarding.

--Sen Tom Harkin
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/7/17249/1737

[pnorman]

1. "Spanish American War":

*
*
*
The water cure consisted of tossing handfuls of salt added to a stream of water that poured down the throats of the tortured while on their backs. After the bodies bloated to the point of bursting, those administering the "Òcure" followed by a stomping on the victims" stomachs to expel the water.

Soldiers in the field like Lieutenant Samuel Powell Lyon didn't seem to have a problem with the use of torture. In a 1901 letter, Lyon wrote, "The problem of the 'water cure' is in knowing how to apply it." His commander-in-chief agreed. President Theodore Roosevelt referred to the practice as "an old Filipino method of mild torture."

Others preferred not use the "T" word. Methodist missionary Reverend Homer Stuntz believed that since the victim had the power to stop the process or prevent it altogether, the water cure could not be labeled as such. His reasoning continued: "The treatment is never given wantonly; or, if so, it was without sanction," only "given to spies." In a New York Times piece dated May 3, 1902, General Wheaton Young simply denied the United States Army had ever used the water cure in the Philippines.

Congressional inquiries produced three volumes of testimony and analysis that disagreed with the general. The panel believed that because it was deemed "mild" from so many quarters, the use of the water cure was widespread, not isolated. In other words, torture was not an aberration.

When government officials, then as now, consign certain military acts to the realm of the accidental, they obscure the rationality of war - its unending search for the enemy and its sense of comfort offered to the self-righteous. Torture results in what the torturer wants to hear, which is rarely the truth.
*
*
*

http://bellatrys.livejournal.com/tag/spanish-american+war

pnorman