Dennis McKee – 5/6/09

This page was last updated on May 17, 2009.

No excuse can justify torture; Dennis McKee; Beaver County Times; May 6, 2009.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“As a Marine, I find it difficult accepting our former president and his circle believe the torture of an American hero, John McCain, was proper.

“The Bush administration even believes the reasons the North Vietnamese tortured him and others were valid, as they use their exact reason. They did it to save lives. (Theirs.)”

[RWC] Before you accept Mr. McKee’s attempt to equate the treatment Sen. John McCain and other American prisoners endured in North Vietnam with that experienced by terrorists at the hands of the U.S., I suggest you do a little research. You’ll find the treatment isn’t anywhere near comparable.

I encourage you to read the so-called “torture memos” released by the U.S. DOJ on April 16, 2009. For example, the Obama administration considers the “attention grasp” to be torture. According to the 8/1/02 memo, “The attention grasp consists of grasping the individual with both hands, one hand on each side of the collar opening, in a controlled and quick manner. In the same motion, the individual is drawn toward the interrogator.”

“Anyone yet figure out that an OK for torture of enemy soldiers is an OK for torture of ours? Water boarding is OK for your soldiers, but not Americans? Try telling that to your captors.”

[RWC] Mr. McKee failed to note many of our soldiers go through water boarding during training so they know what to expect if captured. By the way, there’s misinformation circulating that the Japanese used water boarding during World War II and it was prosecuted as a war crime. The only similarity between the Japanese “water boarding” and U.S. water boarding is the name.

“The Nuremberg Trials show we prosecuted people under the Geneva Convention criminally for torturing, and that we did not accept as a rationale ‘we were only following orders.’”

[RWC] The Geneva Conventions provide no explicit definition of torture. The closest the GCs get is “Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment.” This language is so vague and subject to interpretation, interrogators employing common interrogation techniques (not torture) could be tried for war crimes.

Of course, the key is what defines “torture.” I could be mistaken, but I don’t believe anyone was prosecuted during The Nuremberg Trials for the “attention grasp,” “facial hold,” “facial slap (insult slap),” et cetera.

“If any of the Bush administration policymakers were real soldiers, they would understand the quickest way to get our soldiers tortured is to torture theirs.

“To have them admit we torture people shows not only are they common criminals, it shows stunning disrespect for the safety of our men and women in combat.

“What would happen to our women soldiers if they were captured by the same group of enemy combatants we are torturing in Gitmo?”

[RWC] The “do unto others” (reciprocity) argument is bogus and even Mr. McKee provides the evidence. To the best of my knowledge, no one credibly accused the U.S. of torture during the Vietnam War, yet that didn’t stop the NVA from torturing as standard operating procedure. The same was true for Japan during World War II. Making it even “worse,” Japan and the NVA were covered by the Geneva Conventions. As a reminder, terrorists are not subject to the Geneva Conventions because they are not signatories.

“What would happen to our women soldiers?” What am I missing? Do female soldiers warrant more concern than male soldiers?

“This policy? Immoral, criminal, irresponsible, disrespectful, hypocritical and stupid come to mind.”

[RWC] For the rest of my comments, please read my critique of “Let’s talk about double standards.”