Daily Kos

View Story | 323 comments

  •  Basically it is sexual humiliation... (none / 0)

    the female interrogator would walk in on the detainee while he is in the shower or on the toilet and stare at his genitals and make sexual comments and degrade the prisoner by referring to penis size, how the prisoner wipes himself or cleans himself - just trying to humiliate the detainee as much as possible. This is the technique that the ICRC said was "tantamount to torture" and the FBI said in its memos amounted to "torture".

    This could also be done shortly after a forced enema.

    Whether this is abuse or mental torture it dosn't really matter, because it is a grave violation of the Geneva Conventions.

    Honor bound to defend freedom. Freedom is long-standing army regulations.

    by RichardG on Tue May 17, 2005 at 01:23:46 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not according to Googled sources (none / 0)

      WaPo, for example, defines "change of scenery down" as "putting a prisoner in a worse place". An example given elsewhere is a more barren cell.

      There may be more than one meaning, of course.

      "C'mon -- if THAT were true, you wouldn't be getting the news from some crazy email forwarded by your brother-in-law!"

      by technopolitical on Tue May 17, 2005 at 06:04:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "A worse place" somehow became the... (none / 0)

        shower or bathroom and involved only female interrogators. Someone approved this illegal abusive treatment and they should be held responsible.

        If you read the definition on withholding "incentives" it won't say withholding toilet paper or access to a toilet, but that is what happened.

        The point is who approved all of this interrogator abuse that violates the Geneva Conventions and the UCMJ and why are they not being held responsible?

        It is also clear that techniques were designed to specifically violate the religous convictions of the detainees, which means there was probably high level involvment.

        Honor bound to defend freedom. Freedom is long-standing army regulations.

        by RichardG on Wed May 18, 2005 at 07:10:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

View Story | 323 comments