ABU GHRAIB TACTICS ARE 'AUTHORIZED' BY GENEVA CONVENTIONS, BUSH ADMIN CONCLUDES

That's the headline law prof blogger Marty Lederman says would be  most accurate for the partial release yesterday of the latest investigation of Gitmo. Marty's post is extraordinary:

The Schmidt Summary explains in great detail that certain interrogation techniques approved and employed at GTMO—particularly those used on Mohammed al-Qahtani, which I've previously described, were "abusive" and "degrading," and further reveals that the interrogation of another "high-value" detainee included unlawful threats against the lives of the detainee and his family. And yet then the Report somehow, and without any explanation whatsoever, concludes that all treatment at GTMO was "humane"—indeed, that the investigators found "no evidence" of any "inhumane treatment" at Guantanamo!

Abusive and degrading . . . yet humane.  Speaks volumes, doesn't it?

That is not, however, the most alarming thing about the Schmidt Report. More disturbing still is the Report's repeated assertions that the techniques in question —which included, for example, having female interrogators physically seduce and taunt a Muslim detainee; forcing him to wear a bra and placing a thong on his head during interrogation; tying him to a leash, leading him around the room and forcing him to perform a series of dog tricks; stripping him naked; and pouring water on his head during interrogation 17 times—  are not only "humane," but also are authorized by Army Field Manual 34-52.  Field Manual 34-52 has, since the 1960's, defined the interrogation techniques that are acceptable within the military even for POWs who are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions.

[I]f, as the Schmidt Report concludes, the techniques used at GTMO are authorized by the Army Field Manual itself, it then follows that the military may use those techniques on any detainees, including POWs, anywhere in the world, in any conflict.

In other words, the remember all those disgusting things at Abu Ghraib which were just done by a few bad apples? The report says they were authorized techniques and asserts that they're still legit. As Andrew Sullivan puts it today--in one of a series of valuable posts:

Abu Ghraib is and was policy - just policy absorbed by ill-trained, unprofessional hoodlums. But those hoodlums didn't get their ideas from thin air. They got them from the Pentagon and the White House.

By the way, I can't emphasize enough the degree to  which the  NYT  booted this  one. Their headline on  the report is a study in know-nothingness:  "REPORT DISCREDITS F.B.I. CLAIMS OF ABUSE AT GUANTÁNAMO BAY."

Comments

[J.]

Absolutely agree. I can't understand "humane but abusive" treatment. I do believe that there still may be a distinction between those individuals that went beyond even these "guidelines" and could still be considered "bad apples." But this behavior by DOD leadership is very bad stuff.

[!]

My favorite thing in all of this is how easily the prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment" is downplayed. Dang centuries old paper! Making rules not worth following!

[I.M. Small]

AMERICAN P.R. LIKE GOLD LEAF

George Herbert Walker famously
Disliked broccoli rabe,
And he meandered aimlessly
Until he met his babe;
The lies he told, most shamelessly
Would shock old Honest Abe,
Yet their results, not blamelessly,
Extend to Abu Ghraib.

That prison's owner was Sadaam,
Our buddy in Iraq
Whom we supplied with gas and bomb
Until we changed our tack.
(By gas I mean, as for pogrom,
Nor we did not look back,
Nor he considered it haram,
When Shias he did attack.)

Invading so to occupy
His country, the US
Took over functions, low and high,
One might say, more or less:
No different the hotel Hanoi
Which France had used to press
Vietnamese, did they employ
To make GI's confess.

Such is the prison culture, these
Are built so to achieve
Certain results, not just to seize
Captives, you can believe:
Beyond the torture prison sees
Such deaths wardens nor grieve--
Keys bring responsibilities
Hard conscience to reprieve.

Catch-22 transfers the guilt
To whom would be the master;
When prisons have been sturdy built
Required is no forecaster
To point the end the means fulfilt,
For function is outlaster
Though owners change, though it be gilt
As gold-leaf covers plaster.

The place is seldom plenty fun
For such as are consigned
Captive to prison--gently run
Not likely: hate is blind.
Cruel guard, did he relent, he won
No favor for the grind,
While, where none honest went, he won
Promotion, praise assigned:
Should leasehold claim S-21
Could 22 be far behind?

Beneath Pol Pot e'en Camelot
Would turn into fiasco;
While any sot who likes it hot
May ask for some tobasco;
So with no plans or with, a man's
Inclined to sink like water
To lowest depths: Americans
Purchased cruelty and slaughter.