According to the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Although this amendment is vague, at best, many have recently stood against actions taken by the U.S. military and organizations such as the CIA, making claims of unconstitutional techniques to acquire information along with violations of basic human rights and the Geneva Convention.At the tip of this spear, resides Senator John McCain. During his term of service in Vietnam, Lieutenant McCain was captured by the North Vietnamese and tortured. The senator claims that interrogation tactics that would be considered torture will, more often than not, produce false intelligence while undermining this nation’s values and moral code. So what then, is torture?
With mention of the word, images of medieval racks and water tortures are conjured in our minds. Religious zealots in righteous fervor seem to be the stereotypical culprits of these depraved actions; however, in these modern times, what exactly could be defined as ‘cruel and unusual’? Would the excessive use of techniques considered cruel, thereby eliminate the ‘unusual’ clause of the Eighth Amendment? Would the framers of our Constitution feel justified in the techniques used for gaining information in the war on terror?
In December, 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld approved a list of interrogation techniques for the acquisition of information from what have been considered ‘uncooperative’ prisoners. The list, which was revised and re-released April 2003, includes the following: sleep “adjustment,” grabbing/poking/pushing inmates, Good cop/Bad cop routines, intense questioning, and exposure to unpleasant smells.
The original list, released in 2002, contained seven other techniques deemed “inappropriate,” such as prolonged standing, sensory deprivation, prolonged interrogations, shaving of beards (particularly insulting to the Islamic faith), use of phobias, removal of clothing, and the hooding of prisoners during questioning. Although removed from the updated 2003 list, all of these techniques were noted as approvable with the permission of Rumsfeld himself.
Since the Abu Ghraib prison scandals, Pentagon officials have conducted investigations into detainee abuse by military officials. In Afghanistan it was found that interrogators were removing clothing, isolating prisoners for extended periods, using “stress positions,” using phobias such as fear of dogs, and implementing sleep and light deprivation techniques.
Prisoners themselves have alleged the use of electric shocks, beatings, and immersion in cold water. Guantanamo Bay prisoners experienced similar conditions. Abu Ghraib, the worst of the worst, was reported to be forcing naked male prisoners to wear women’s underwear, masturbate in full view of other prisoners and guards, using dogs to scare and even attack inmates, punching and kicking of inmates, and taking photographs of dead Iraqi prisoners.
In a 2002 memo, President Bush declared that members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban would not be eligible for prisoner of war status, while, however, calling for treating “detainees humanely, including those who are not legally entitled to such treatment.” Legally, members of terrorist organizations do not apply for POW status, due to the fact that they are not part of a “warring entity” but are guerilla factions, who have no nation or loyalties but their own cause.
Rather than marching on Washington for humane treatment of all prisoners in American possession, consider the following. Techniques used by the U.S. military and the CIA have produced information which have led to the capture of leading Al Qaeda, Taliban, and Iraqi government figures as well as interventions upon planned terrorist activities in which the total casualties would number in the thousands.
In a war fought unlike any other, in which terror is the means and the fighters would hide amongst the innocent, can we justify the use of equally uncommon techniques for our own forces? Does the use of questionable practices in fact cheapen the American code of values, or are they in fact the most effective and just ways in which to fight those who would attack the innocent?
Congress is currently passing bills and laws in order to further define the rules in which the American operations are allowed to operate. Already, many have been passed in favor of less “cruel and unusual” techniques.
The question now lies in the hands of the individual; how do you feel about the use of these techniques in the sands of the Middle East, and what are you going to do about it? As always, I urge everyone to take time out of their busy schedule and effect change in one way or another by contacting your state representative committees.