Tortuous interpretations

By Michelle Malkin  •  June 23, 2004 12:27 AM

Power Line’s John Hinderaker takes a closer look at the Associated Press report on how President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld supposedly gave the green light to unleash torture on al Qaeda detainees:

I found this paragraph, near the end of the AP’s account, astonishing:

“[Rumsfeld] approved 24 interrogation techniques, to be used in a manner consistent with the Geneva Conventions, but said that any use of four of those methods would have to be approved by him in advance. Those four were use of rewards or removal of privileges from detainees; attacking or insulting the ego of a detainee; alternating the use of friendly and harsh interrogators, and isolation.”

I hate to disillusion liberals, but as a trial lawyer, I routinely use two of those four techniques in cross-examining witnesses, and I use at least one of the other two on my children. Frankly, I find it appalling that those in charge of terrorist prisoners may only “reward or remove privileges from detainees” with the permission of the Secretary of Defense. If the Democrats had any sense, they would argue that these documents indict the administration as soft on terrorists.

Yup. Seems to be my theme of the day…and the day is 26 minutes old.

Posted in: Torture

Add your opinion

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

You must be logged in to post a comment.



The Other McCain

» Paralysis by analysis

Legal Insurrection

» NY Times Names Names

HotAir GreenRoom