First, a little background:
I have a great deal of personal experience working in all kinds of military and government prisons, dealing with “enemy combatants.” As a matter of fact, if a prison exists, I have either been there myself, or am closely associated with someone who has. I have been involved in all manner of interrogations, including the “enhanced” variety.

Here is what I’ve seen:
I’ve seen people frightened. I’ve seen people humiliated. I’ve seen people insulted. In short, I’ve seen people’s feelings get hurt.

As a matter of policy, I have NOT seen people beaten. I have not seen a bruise form or a bone broken. I have not seen anyone wait for medical care for longer than the time necessary to find an available doctor. I have not seen anyone denied food, water, or bathroom facilities for more than could be considered reasonable (i.e. as long as any of you would deny yourselves these same services if, lets say, you were having a busy day at work).

I HAVE seen people cross the line, and I have seen those people taken off in chains.

So, yeah, go to a military prison, get your feelings hurt, not get to do whatever you want whenever you want, but have your physical well being guaranteed, save for the potential freak criminal act.

You may call that torture. I call that junior high.

Now, before the attacks come in, claiming I am some kind of brainwashed government stooge, let me explain:
I no longer work for the government, and will never work for them again. I am sickened to have worked to further their pointless agenda on the back of so much human misery. If someone came along and stripped the government down to where it was 200 years ago (ya know, the one the founding fathers set up) I would be dancing in the street.
So, why am I defending the government on this point? Because I want to see them go down, but not over some crap some journalist heard from an unsubstantiated source (who, in turn, was full of crap), which was then repeated ad-nausium by a bunch of other journalists. I want to see them go down for the right reasons; for the things they actually DID.
Besides which, claiming that making someone feel bad about themselves is the same thing as cutting someone’s fingers off, one by one, is an insult to the many American vets who have endured REAL torture and remained loyal to their convictions.

As an aside, I have friends who work in the (civilian) prison system, and I think the real question is: Would you rather go to GITMO or Attica? Knowing what I know, it would be GITMO 10 times out of 10.

Waterboarding is a non-issue for the argument Sullivan is making, McCain has never mentioned waterboarding.

Beating is a different issue, the administration’s position is that beating is not allowed HOWEVER beating does not include pokes and prods which blurs the black-and-whiteness of the issue. Beating prisoners is not allowed but when does physical contact change from allowable poking to unallowable beating? Is all physical contact to be considered beating, and if so would offering a prisoner who has twisted an ankle a hand up be prohibited (as a beating) or would forcing an injured prisoner who has fallen to stand up on their own be abusive? Arguments can be made for prohibiting poking and prodding (a good one is that it blurs the line between beating permissible poking making it likely that interrogators will without realizing it start to torture) but is it appropriate to consider all physical contact or even just poking to be torture?

An argument can be made that the treatment McCain received does not meet the Bush admionistration definition of torture but Sullivan hasn’t made it, at best he’s assumed it (let’s be generous). It’s a straight logical error, ascribing the charecteristics of one member of a group to be characteristics of the entire group . It is particularly offensive given that the administration has repeatedly pointed out that any of these procedures if used differently would constitute torture by the US.

Here’s the link:
http://www.vba.va.gov/BLN/21/rates/comp01.htm

BTW, I’m a disabled vet myself (rated at 70% with spouse if you want to know how much taxpayers give me each month) so I know what I’m talking about.

Maybe you’re talking about his retirement pay? He retired as a Navy Captain (06), one rank before Admiral (or General in the Army). His retirement pay is probably close to $60K a year, but he earned that by serving 33 years in the Navy. How many did you serve?

People who comment ignorantly always get my goat. Anyone who claims that McCain is paid $60K a year in disability payments is either making the number up or doesn’t bother to do his homework before making such an ignorant claim.

Two meals a day and 6 hours of sleep is a normal day for me (and probably 50% of working-class Americans). If that’s torture then my company needs to be taken to Geneva! LOL

Thanks. I think we’re pretty close on this then. One point where you might be wrong though: I think there’s plenty who would consider 2 meals a day and 6 hours of sleep torture. I wish they’d shut up because it makes the more reasonable “anti-torture” positions look bad.

Also, I agree about the kharma thing. It’s really silly.

#27 | Alex | August 21st, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Nando,

Could you expand your point? Sure waterboarding is black-and-white, but what about long-time standing and sleep deprivation? I don’t see how one could deny a huge grey area there.

Sure I can. What you’re thinking of is a function of time vice recurrence, i.e. making someone stand for 15 minutes isn’t as bad as making them stand for 15 hours. That is true and I doubt anyone will argue that point. What I meant to say is that making someone stand for 15 hours is torture, no matter if you do it once or if you do it “excessively,” as Max pointed out (and Yoo wrote about).

The same goes for sleep deprivation or withholding food or water. In a perfect, non-torturous world, Gitmo would have set schedules, just like in prison. You get to eat at x:xx time EVERY day; lights out are at x:xx time, EVERY day…etc. Interrogations should only consist of the interviews conducted by the interrogators, not other tactics which “enhance” the interrogation process. I think it’s pretty clear that none of these methods work, other than creating a rapport and befriending the detainee.

I’m also not arguing for the interrogations to stop because it’s lunch time or what have you, but allowing a person access to food twice a day wouldn’t amount to torture in anyone’s book. That means they can wake the detainee up in the morning, offer him breakfast (he doesn’t have to eat it, but they have to offer it) and then proceed to interrogate him all day long if they’d like, so long as he’s offered dinner before he goes to sleep (hopefully allowing a minimum of 6 hours for rest each day).

And I don’t think that the quality of the comments has gone down. It is just that Radley didn’t allow comments for so long, and once he did, they degenerated pretty quickly. The “voting” system just makes it worse.

Could you expand your point? Sure waterboarding is black-and-white, but what about long-time standing and sleep deprivation? I don’t see how one could deny a huge grey area there.

I think it’s a black or white situation. Either a situation constitutes torture or it doesn’t. You mean to tell us that if a detainee is waterboarded once then it’s not torture but if waterboarded repeatedly then it amounts to torture? What about the beatings some prisoners have received? If you only beat one prisoner, or each prisoner once, you’re not torturing them?

These procedures don’t need to be used excessively to be considered torture. They only need to be used once.

#5 | my 2 cents | August 20th, 2008 at 5:39 pm

Way back when I once voted for McCain. Neither he nor I are the same person. What really gets me is that he is worth millions, yet get $1900+ a month in social security,Plus military disability benefits.And No one else seems to think this is an important issue. If I still voted I would vote for Paris, not kidding either. my 2 cents

I don’t think your two cents are even worth two cents.

McCain earned his military retirement pay, he earned his disability pay, and he earned his Social Security pay. What possible reason could you give any sane person to convince them to NOT receive money they’ve EARNED? I might not like McCain as a person or as a candidate (much less as a President), but I will not question him for accepting what he deserves.

However, I would think higher of him if he voluntarily turned those benefits down. I just don’t think he should be thought of any less for accepting them.

Well, it’s not official state policy. That’s all we can know for sure with this administration.

Are we sure it is not official state policy? There has been some credible evidence pointing to the fact that it actually was sanctioned by the White House (I’m refering to the meeting of Rice, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft & Cheney). If that turns out to be true, how can it NOT be offcial state policy?

Deeply fishy? Has anyone actually read some of the stories of the American POWs during that war? There is nothing fishy about it what so ever and it is so beyond the pale to….

You did nothing to defend the story other than shout “THY SHALL NOT QUESTION McHERO ABOUT HIS McHEROISM”. Funny it seemed legitimate to question a veterns creditials when they are a democrat, but not so much when they are a republican. Funny how that works.

Down, boy! If Clinton was still president, I would have used the same language. Pointing out that this administration is dishonest and incompetent doesn’t naturally imply that any other administration wasn’t.