|
‘Harsh methods’ aren’t
torture, says the NY Times
May 14— The New York Times, revealing the
interrogation techniques the CIA is using against al-Qaida suspects,
seemed unable to find a source who would call torture by its proper
name.
The May 13 article, headlined “Harsh CIA Methods Cited in Top Qaida
Interrogation,” described “coercive interrogation methods”
endorsed by the CIA and the Justice Department, including hooding, food
and light deprivation, withholding medications, and “a technique
known as ‘water boarding,’ in which a prisoner is strapped
down, forcibly pushed under water and made to believe he might drown.”
The article took pains to explain why, according to US officials, such
techniques do not constitute torture: “Defenders of the operation
said the methods stopped short of torture, did not violate American
anti-torture statutes, and were necessary to fight a war against a nebulous
enemy whose strength and intentions could only be gleaned by extracting
information from often uncooperative detainees.”
The article seemed to accept that the techniques described are something
other than torture: “The tactics simulate torture, but officials
say they are supposed to stop short of serious injury.” The implication
is that only interrogation methods that cause serious physical harm
would be real and not simulated torture.
The article quoted no one who said that the CIA methods described were,
in fact, torture. Yet it would have been easy to find human rights experts
who would describe them as such. The website of Human Rights Watch reports
that “the prohibition against torture under international law applies
to many measures,” including “near drowning through submersion
in water.” Amnesty International USA names “submersion into
water almost to the point of suffocation” as a form of torture,
and emphasizes that torture “can be psychological, including threats,
deceit, humiliation, insults, sleep deprivation, blindfolding, isolation,
mock executions...and the withholding of medication or personal items.”
The article did quote the Geneva Conventions’ prohibition against
“violence to life and person, in particular...cruel treatment and
torture” and “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular,
humiliating and degrading treatment.” But it did not quote the
definition of “torture” under international law, contained
in the 1984 Convention Against Torture, which makes it clear that psychological
as well as physical methods of coercion are prohibited. According to
the Convention, “torture” is: “any act by which severe
pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted
on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person
information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third
person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating
or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination
of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation
of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other
person acting in an official capacity.”
Noting the Convention’s reference to “consent or acquiescence”
would have been helpful in evaluating the claims made by officials in
the article that the US can skirt prohibitions on torture if detainees
are formally in the custody of another country. In fact, the Convention
Against Torture, which the US signed in 1994, explicitly prohibits sending
a person anywhere “where there are substantial grounds for believing
that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” If the
Times had included independent human rights or international law experts
in the article, this information could have been available to readers.
Even talking to military sources could have produced a more straightforward
account of what kind of interrogation is prohibited by international
law; the Wall Street Journal (5/13/04), in an article about Iraq prison
tactics published the same day as the Times piece, quoted a former Marine
judge who admitted that “there’s no getting around it, we
have ignored provisions of the Geneva Convention in favor of gathering
intelligence.”
In fact, the Times might have looked back to its own archives on the
subject to find critics of US detention policies. Some of the information
included in the May 13, 2004 article was first reported on March 9,
2003— except the original story quoted Holly Burkhalter of Physicians
for Human Rights, who decried the lack of a “specific policy that
eschews torture.” It also noted critics’ assertion that “transferring
Qaida suspects to countries where torture is believed common —
like Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia — violates American law and
the 1984 international convention against torture, which bans such transfers.”
While the article did impart important information about the tactics
being used by American agents to interrogate terrorist suspects, it
is also critical to know whether these methods violate international
or domestic law. By relying solely on administration officials to define
what torture is and what the US government’s legal obligations
are, the New York Times failed to provide the context necessary for
readers to make an informed judgment.
Source: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Police attack striking cinema workers
during Cannes Festival
Compiled by John Lapp
May 19 (AGR) — The day following a sit-in at a Cannes Film
Festival theater on May 15, approximately 2,000 protesters marched through
the streets of Cannes, France. The march consisted of striking French
cinema workers and their supporters, including controversial American
film maker Michael Moore and French farmer and anti-globalization spokesperson
Jose Bove, infamous for leading a daylight assault on a French MacDonald’s
that was under construction at the time. Protesters chanted “abrogation”
in reference to their call for recent reforms to their unemployment
benefit system to be overturned. The procession advanced to the beat
of drums and a cacophony of sirens and whistles.
The workers are demanding that new laws, called the Unedic Protocol,
which cut unemployment benefits to French Cinema workers, such as stage
hands and small actors, be totally repealed. The French Minister of
Culture, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, has moved to ease the reforms but
many protesters say not enough has been done.
THE May 15 sit-in began with a march in which a break away group of
about 150 protestors ran into the Star Cinema which was screening films
fo r the festival and occupied the foyer of the building to disrupt
the movies and force out filmgoers.
Soon after the occupation a contingent of over a dozen plainclothes
officers entered the theatre and began to forcibly remove the protesters.
Around 50 CRS riot police followed the plainclothes police officers
and then began to punch and kick the protesters. Some protesters were
dragged out on to the side walk and beaten there. Medics treated several
injured protesters on the scene, including one man who was apparently
knocked unconscious and who was led away with his face streaming with
blood. According to a communique sent out by the protesters at least
6 people were arrested at the theatre and 5 people were injured. 4 of
the 5 people injured required hospitalization from the beatings.
“The occupation was peaceful. Plainclothes officers went in to
clear us out, they were punching and using night sticks. They charged
in like brutes. Several (market accreddited) professionals were knocked
over,” said one protester, who gave his name as Claude.
After police broke up the occupation, most of the protesters involved
in the occupation staged a sit-in at an intersection in front of the
Cannes police station to protest the police violence. The sit-in succeeded
in blocking traffic for over an hour. Riot police were unable to attack
the group, because they were blocked by the large cluster of automobiles
due to the traffic jam caused by the sit-in. The group of protesters
chanted “Free our comrades!” in front of the station. One
journalist was reportedly arrested while filming the events, but the
protesters managed to escape without an arrest.
“I am here today in solidarity with the French workers who are
here to seek a living wage,” Moore shouted through a megaphone
May 16 as he stood next to French anti-globalization protester Jose
Bove.
“A job is a human right, a living wage is a human right. This is
a human right,” Moore told the workers in the midst of a chaotic
media scrum on the Croisette beachwalk at the Cannes film festival.
France has deployed 1,000 police to protect this year’s festival
amid fears that disgruntled entertainment workers protesting over unemployment
benefits could disrupt the events.
Sources: AAP, Reuters, Daily Entertainment
News,A-Infos News Service
|
