Ever since the Bush Administration stepped down, many new things have been popping up about the interrogation methods that were used in the Bush era. And with the big Waterboarding scandal that has erupted, and with the constant argument of waterboarding not being a form of torture, the US Government is looking highly confused on the whole interrogation process of terror suspects.
Barack Obama was quick with his public denunciation of these interrogation methods, especially when it comes to Guantanamo Bay. And to further drive his point home, Obama appointed Leon Panetta (who is not a big fan of torture) as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
If you have read any of my earlier articles, you do know that I am not the biggest supporter of torture as well, but I do have to say that some of the methods that people are speaking up against are slightly out of hand.
The recent outpour of people speaking out against the US's interrogation methods are mainly due to the highly publicised holding of Abu Zubaydah, a high ranking Al Qaeda member and close associate of Osama Bin Laden. Abu Zubaydah was, according to CIA papers, subjected to 'enhanced interrogation techniques' that now currently have the media and the public speaking out very harshly against the CIA and Bush Administration. And the 10 main interrogation methods that are under heavy scrutiny are as follows;
(l) attention grasp
(2) walling
(3) facial hold
(4) facial slap (insult slap)
(5) cramped confinement
(6) wall standing
(7) stress positions
(8) sleep deprivation
(9) insects placed in a confinement box
(10) the waterboard.
Now what I am beginning to wonder is, are these really torture methods? When dealing with a confirmed Al-Qaeda member and Bin Laden associate, should the US really be concerned about slapping him? Come on, these are basic interrogation methods, and even though some of them (like waterboarding) can be dangerous they are in place only to guarantee Homeland Security. Really is the deprivation of sleep really a method that can be classified as dangerous, especially when dealing with such a high ranking individual?
I must say that I am confused and looking forward to the proposed interrogation methods, if the ones listed above are outlawed.
Further reading on this topic; http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6111109.ece
No comments:
Post a Comment