![]() |
|
|
November 2, 2007 at 17:19:41
A Brief on the Use of Water Torture by American Officials in the War on Terrorism by William John Cox Page 1 of 3 page(s) |
|
|
In the Matter of the Nomination of Michael B. Mukasey to be Attorney General of the United States of America A Brief on the Use of Water Torture by American Officials in the War on Terrorism WHEREAS President George W. Bush has nominated Michael B. Mukasey to serve as the Attorney General of the United States, a cabinet position established by law, and has requested the advice and consent of the United States Senate to the appointment pursuant to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America ; and WHEREAS the Committee on the Judiciary is preparing to vote on the nomination; and
WHEREAS the nominee was asked by members of the Committee whether the use of "waterboarding," an interrogation technique that simulates drowning, by American officials on prisoners taken into custody in the war on terrorism amounts to torture; and
WHEREAS the nominee has stated that his legal opinion on waterboarding would depend on the facts and circumstances of the program and that he has not been briefed on the government’s program and techniques;
THEREFORE the following brief is submitted for his enlightenment and for such other use as the Committee may find appropriate.
DESCRIPTION OF WATER TORTURE
During water torture, the body and head of a victim is typically strapped to an inclined board with the head lower than the feet. The victim’s jaws are forced open and a cloth is forced deep into the mouth and over the nose. Water is continuously poured over and into the cloth forcing the victim to stop breathing until forced to either swallow water and/or aspirate it into the lungs, triggering the gag reflex.
Water torture results in controlled drowning, the degree of which depends upon the ability of an individual to resist and the will of the torturer. The punishment ranges from psychological torment and physical suffocation to death. At the least, water torture represents a mock execution. The primeval fear of asphyxiation leads to overwhelming panic in even the most disciplined individuals who may be trained and psychologically conditioned to die rather than submit.
Water torture can lead to serious injury to the victim. A lack of oxygen can quickly result in permanent brain damage, and the aspiration of even small amounts of water can lead to lung disease, including pneumonia. Struggles by the victim against the restraints can produce severe sprains and broken bones. Significantly, the intense fear of imminent death and the victim’s helplessness to prevent it produces devastating and long lasting psychological damage.
HISTORY OF WATER TORTURE
The use of water to simulate drowning has been used as a torture device since at least the Middle Ages. It was known as the tortura del agua during the Spanish Inquisition and was used by agents of the Dutch East India Company during the Amboyna massacre in 1623.
Water torture has been acknowledged by the United States to be illegal since at least 1901 when an Army officer was convicted and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for using it to torture a Philippine rebel.
In 1947, a Japanese officer was prosecuted by the United States for strapping a U.S. civilian to a tilted stretcher and pouring water over his face until he agreed to talk. The officer was convicted of a Violation of the Laws and Customs of War and was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
In 1957, French forces in Algeria tortured Henri Alleg, a journalist, by strapping him to a plank and wrapping his head in a cloth placed under a running water tap. Alleg later talked about his torture in The Question: "The rag was soaked rapidly. Water flowed everywhere: in my mouth, in my nose, all over my face. But for a while I could still breathe in some small gulps of air. I tried, by contracting my throat, to take in as little water as possible and to resist suffocation by keeping air in my lungs for as long as I could. But I couldn’t hold on for more than a few moments. I had the impression of drowning, and a terrible agony, that of death itself, took possession of me. In spite of myself, all the muscles of my body struggled uselessly to save me from suffocation. In spite of myself, the fingers of both my hands shook uncontrollably."
http://www.thevoters.org
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 4 comments |
|
Torture
Perhaps those that condone it and those who agree to carry it out should be required to experience it. In my opinion you at least should know what you're talking about before you okay it to be used on others. Let's start with Cheney, then Bush and on down the line including the rubber stampers among the elected. by Rae (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 230 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Nov 3, 2007 at 5:35:17 PM
|
|
Reply: Similar to "This product not tested on animals" ?
Perhaps we could design a logo that identifies news sources etc as "This information not obtained through torture." Instead of the little bunny with the bar/circle, it might be the shape of the hooded and wired-to-a-box Iraqi with the bar/circle. FOX won't be displaying it, of course, since they volunteered a staff member to try waterboarding on himself and then said it wasn't that bad. And I think the John Kerry camp would not get the logo on any of their documents and speeches after allowing the tasaring of the U of Florida student. The list of who can't display such a logo increasingly seems to outnumber the list of who CAN... by Mars Caulton (1 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 88 comments) on Sunday, Nov 4, 2007 at 12:08:02 AM
|
|
Whereas, Senate Democrats want to have it both ways
" The Senate had a chance to settle the question in September 2006 when Sen. Ted Kennedy offered an amendment to declare waterboarding and other coercive interrogation techniques a violation of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. His amendment lost 46-53. So Senate Democrats are now demanding that Mukasey declare waterboarding a violation of Common Article 3 when the Senate declined to do the same just a year ago." by tim bristol (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 89 comments) on Saturday, Nov 3, 2007 at 6:42:28 PM
|
|
Certain proper uses of otherwise deplorable techniques...
I think that in certain cases waterboarding may be justified. For instance, consider the matter of a president or vice president, sworn to uphold the Constitution (which includes provision for the separation of powers) who wilfully and consistently refuses to recognize a justified call by the Congress for information or testimony from that elected official pertinent to the investigative duty of the Congress. In such instances, the security and welfare of the people of the United States may be severely compromised, for we have no other protection against an adminstration bent on its own course despite their sworn oath to abide by the provisions of the Constitution. Yes, we do have the recourse of impeachment — or we once did — but waterboarding is so much more expedient! by Irvthom (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 91 comments) on Saturday, Nov 3, 2007 at 8:42:03 PM
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |