I propose we waterboard the Red Cross.

Good one. Jane Mayer, whose biases are well known, writes a book. In it, according to the Post, she supposedly says that she got inside info from some unnamed "officials" (of something) about a supposedly unreleased confidential report that she hasn't seen, supposedly describing certain interrogation techniques as torture, because some of the detainees supposedly told the Red Cross that they were tortured.

Boy, what an airtight case that is. Sounds like a grade-school game of Telephone.

Also interesting is that the quote in the lead post doesn't seem to be in the report. That wildly speculative conclusion comes from a New York Times writer by the name of Scott Shane, a man who has often breathlessly compared waterboarding to the Spanish Inquisition.

Good grief.

I'm still trying to determine where the 'panties on the head' interrogation method falls in the torture spectrum.

I saw that in an episode of Alf. To hide Alf so the cops won't fire tear gas, Willie puts him in Mrs. Ochmonek's laundry basket along with her dirty dainties. Alf resists, saying, "How bad does tear gas smell?" LOL LOL

Of course, our government wouldn't have to try to tapdance around allegations like these if they'd simply allowed the ICRC to fulfill its traditional role in visitation of prisoners. Needless to say, they didn't do so for several years..

We could go round-and-round on the secret report and unnamed sources (blech), but we really should be paying attention to the named sources and specific comments/actions. For instance:

The CIA assessment directly challenged the administration's claim that the detainees were all hardened terrorists -- the "worst of the worst," as then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said at the time. But a top aide to Vice President Cheney shrugged off the report and squashed proposals for a quick review of the detainees' cases, author Jane Mayer writes in "The Dark Side," scheduled for release next week.

"There will be no review," the book quotes Cheney staff director David Addington as saying. "The president has determined that they are ALL enemy combatants. We are not going to revisit it."

Once again, we see the Bush/Cheney "message control" and personal loyalty run amok. The President said it, so it cannot possibly be wrong and we should never question it. (No wonder Addington wouldn't show his face to Congress without a subpoena and was so uncooperative and condescending.)

According to Mayer, the analyst estimated that a full third of the camp's detainees were there by mistake. When told of those findings, the top military commander at Guantanamo at the time, Major Gen. Michael Dunlavey, not only agreed with the assessment but suggested that an even higher percentage of detentions -- up to half -- were in error. Later, an academic study by Seton Hall University Law School concluded that 55 percent of detainees had never engaged in hostile acts against the United States, and only 8 percent had any association with al-Qaeda.

Even our military leaders--most notably the "commander on the scene"--were telling the Administration that they had a big bunch of nothing at Gitmo, but--of course--we don't ever, EVER deviate from the course.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Torture is teh funny! War crimes are a bundle of merry larfs! Tee hee giggle!

Redbeard, even if your only response is to try to discredit the report, I appreciate that in your first post at least you're still the only poster (aside from Wes) to even address this with the seriousness the subject merits. I salute you for that.

The "jokes" are exceptionally unfunny. They'll be even less so when these crimes face some accounting.

A retired Army Major General says "there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

This is a dark and very long-term stain on America's honor that no amount of yuk-yuk-yukking will erase.

I categorically reject the manipulative and demonstrably false claim that government officials can’t protect us unless they’re free to torture (ha ha ha!), free to detain without charge, free to eavesdrop without oversight, free—in every respect—to break the law without consequence.

These aren’t “liberal” values. They’re American ones.

Oh, and just to bring another case of cause-and-effect into view:

But a top aide to Vice President Cheney shrugged off the report and squashed proposals for a quick review of the detainees' cases, author Jane Mayer writes in "The Dark Side," scheduled for release next week.

Had Addington listened to the folks saying "we have a bunch of people here who shouldn't be here - let's expedite their review", we might not have seen the Hamdan or Boumediene decisions. So, if you believe that those decisions have hampered us in the war on terror, you might send a thank-you note to Addington, eh?