THE DAILY BLADE: Depends What The Meaning Of “Torture” Is
It’s been eight months since President Bush authorized the CIA to resume using "enhanced interrogation techniques" on terrorism suspects, but the intelligence agency is loathe to use any of the methods it proposed to the administration until the White House signs off on them in an executive order, reports The Washington Post.
Last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that all U.S. detainees are covered by the Geneva Conventions. Under Common Article 3 of the Military Commissions Act, Bush must certify that the CIA’s interrogation methods to not involve "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." Complicating matters, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence insists that the Department of Justice review the legal underpinnings of the administration’s interpretation of Common Article 3 and the CIA’s proposed interrogation guidelines.
No one would argue that techniques that physically disfigure or disable a person, or are so painful as to cause unconsciousness – such as burning the skin with a blowtorch or gouging out the eyes, just two of the methods used by al-Qaeda – are torturous.
But when it comes to psychological pressure, the difference between "tough" and "torture" is a matter of degree. If interrogators do not go overboard, hooding and other sensory deprivation (though not so extreme as to cause hallucination), keeping cells on the chilly side (though not also dousing detainees with water so as to induce hypothermia) and having a growling dog in close proximity (but always leashed) are aggressive and effective - but not torturous - interrogation techniques.
Another aggressive interrogation technique that some say crosses the line into torture, is blaring popular music for hours on end (reportedly, rap songs by Eminem and Dr. Dre have been used by interrogators in Afghanistan). While The Stiletto doesn’t much care for rap, tens of millions of people worldwide enjoy this musical form and listen to it at ear-splitting volume, which undercuts claims by Human Rights Watch that it constitutes torture.
[Editorial Note: Being forced to listen to Hillary Clinton’s campaign theme song at full blast 24/7 – now that would be torture. And by the way, The Stiletto’s own personal concept of Hell is to be forced to listen to that Barbra Streisand-Celine Dion duet, "Tell Him" (video clip), over-and-over again for all Eternity – at any volume.]
Shoddy Reporting On TB At SC Poultry-Processing Plant
After a case of TB was confirmed at poultry-processing plant Columbia Farms, the SC Department of Health and Environmental Control tested 286 other employees and found that 131 of them had a positive skin test, meaning that they had been exposed to TB. Of those workers, 63 were given chest X-rays, which showed two possible cases of active disease. The Greenville News article includes these direct and indirect quotes from department of health spokesperson Thom Berry:
† [I]nvestigators were not surprised by the number of positive skin tests because so many of the employees are foreign-born.
† "We suspect many may have been infected in their home countries before they came to the U.S."
† There are about 300 new cases a year in South Carolina.
† TB investigations are common in South Carolina.
Nowhere in the 386-word story does Liv Osby, a health writer at The Greenville News, indicate the country or countries of origin of these "foreign born" workers; whether they are in the U.S. illegally; whether the owners or managers of the poultry processing plant had checked their immigration status (they certainly did not know the health status of these workers); whether illegal immigrants constitute most or all of the 300 new cases annually; and why TB investigations are "common" in SC.
Oh, and who’s paying for the six to 12-month course of antibiotics for the 64 workers with possible or confirmed active disease? Their employer? Taxpayers? Another follow-up question the reporter did not think to ask.
Just the latest example of the media not telling the whole story on illegal immigration. (second item, The Daily Blade).
The Back Story Behind The Backdrop Of Romney’s New Ad
In Wednesday’s edition of WaPo blog "The Fix," Chris Cillizza describes a new campaign ad that Mitt Romney launched in IA and NH:
The background behind which Romney is speaking for much of the ad bears the words "Club For Growth." Anyone who considers himself (or herself) a fiscal conservative knows about the Club and its reputation as the defender of staunchly conservative economic policies. While the Club has yet to endorse a candidate, having their logo behind Romney send a clear message to viewers of the ad that he is "one of them."
Well, the Club for Growth also has yet to issue a white paper analyzing Romney’s economic record as governor of MA, as it has for Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. Considering Romney’s flip-flops on the minimum wage, immigration and tax cuts, the Club for Growth might not consider him "one of them," as compared to, say, Rudy, who got an enthusiastic thumbs up from the group on his economic policies while mayor of New York City.
The Club for Growth also "applauded" Rudy’s 12 Commitments last week (though not without a few quibbles):
The Club for Growth applauded Rudy Giuliani for committing himself today to work towards cutting wasteful spending; cutting taxes and tax reform; free-market solutions to healthcare; legal reform; and school choice, but questioned why the former New York City Mayor omitted the equally important issues of Social Security reform, free trade, and regulatory reform. …
"Giuliani’s twelve commitments reflect a solid free-market philosophy that is vital for the country’s long-term economic health," [Club for Growth President Pat Toomey] continued. "We encourage Rudy Giuliani to strengthen his platform by including a commitment to personal Social Security accounts, an explicit endorsement of free trade, and a lighter regulatory hand."
With terrorism, the Iraq War and border security being the country’s – and Rudy’s - main focus in 2008, Social Security reform, free trade, and regulatory reform might have to be put off until 2012.
Comments