A few paragraphs later:
“In addition to using the confinement boxes alone, you also would like to introduce an insect into on of the boxes with Zubaydah. As we understand it, you plan to inform Zubaydah that you are going to place a stinging insect into the box, but you will actually place a harmless insect in the box, such as a caterpillar. If you do so, to ensure that you are outside the predicate act requirement, you must inform him that the insects will not have a sting that would produce death or severe pain. If, however, you were to place the insect in the box without informing him that you are doing so, then, in order to commit a predicate act, you should not affirmatively lead him to believe any insect is present which has a sting that could produce severe pain or suffering or even cause his death ***********SHORT SECTION REDACTED FOR HOPE AND CHANGE IN AMERICA*******************so long as you take either of the approaches we have described, the insects’ placement in the box would not constitute a threat of severe physical pain or suffering to a reasonable person in this position. An individual placed in a box, even an individual with a fear of insects, would not reasonably feel threatened with severe physical pain or suffering if a caterpillar was placed in the box. Further, you have informed us that you are not aware that Zubaydah has any allergies to insects and you have not informed us of any other factors that could cause a reasonable person in that same situation to believe an unknown insect would cause him severe physical pain or death. Thus, we conclude that the placement of the insect in the confinement of the insect in the confinement box with Zubaydah would not constitute a predicate act.”
For the purposes of this article, Chris Floyd wrote in September of 2006 that Zubaydah, at the time of interrogation was “literally insane, suffering from a severe multiple personality disorder.”
Floyd goes on to say, “He was never a top al Qaeda operative, as Bush claimed yet again in his bluster yesterday; and the "information" he spewed out under torture was almost entirely garbage” and he “sent American agents on wild goose chases all over the world.”
So, what do you think when you read any of the sections of the memos which are meant to justify the interrogation techniques used on Zubaydah? Do you think any of this didn’t cause mental or physical harm?
Keywords show just how Bush Administration officials were going to prevent themselves from being accused of torture.
The words “severe physical pain or suffering” mean physical pain and suffering could occur but as long as it wasn’t severe, it was okay.
The words “reasonable person” imply, for one, that a reasonable person would be able to handle being in a box (I wonder if the writers of the memos and those who kept them secret consider themselves to be reasonable men?). The words mean that, possibly, even if taken to court and accused of torture based on Zubaydah’s reactions, one could claim Zubaydah was a “terrorist” and therefore, not a “reasonable man.”
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
3
