Detainee Abuse Remains Inexcusable, Say Humanists
September 7, 2006
For Immediate Release
Contact: Roy Speckhardt, (202) 238-9088
rspeckhardt@americanhumanist.org
- www.americanhumanist.org
(Washington D.C.) President George W. Bush, in his speech in the East Room
of the White House on September 6, admitted, "the CIA used an alternative
set of procedures" for interrogating uncharged detainees in its secret CIA
prisons overseas. Although Bush maintained that the procedures were safe and
legal, he didn't clarify their specific nature because doing so, he said,
"would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning."
"This isn't reassuring," responded American Humanist Association Executive
Director Roy Speckhardt today. "After all, the announcement came the same
day that the Department of Defense released the new Army Field Manual that
not only explicitly bans the forms of prisoner abuse we saw at Abu Graib,
but offers no classified addendum on secret interrogation procedures. So, if
the CIA's 'alternative set of procedures' aren't in the manual, or in a
known classified version, why do these alternative procedures exist? And who
has oversight? Until these questions are answered, it seems our government
isn't being forthcoming with the American people."
American Humanist Association President Mel Lipman added, "The events of
September 11, 2001, offer no excuse to disregard human rights, civil
liberties, and international treaties. Neither do the claimed successes of
these so-called alternative procedures. As Humanists we remain committed to
humane governmental policies."
For years numerous psychologists, sociologists, legal specialists, and even
seasoned military interrogators have maintained that inhumane, abusive, or
cruel interrogation techniques most frequently lead to "junk
intelligence"--false or useless information that prisoners provide
interrogators so the prisoners can get some relief. Moreover, such
techniques are irresponsible in that they put captured U.S. citizens and
military personnel at risk for receiving the same type of treatment in
retaliation.
These are practical considerations. But there are moral ones as well. Lipman
stated: "Torture is wrong because it violates the inherent worth and dignity
of all people: those tortured, those who torture, and those who must live in
a world where this is allowed. That is why ordering it is wrong, allowing it
is wrong, justifying it is wrong, and looking the other way is wrong."
Bringing these values to bear on the Bush administration, Speckhardt
continued:
"We have every right to distrust the details of this administration's
partial
admission. First the government blatantly tried to establish the legality of
torture, as a March 2003 Pentagon memo reveals, then tried to hide captives
in
secret CIA prisons or transfer them to countries that practice torture, and
now seek after-the-fact forgiveness and future congressional approval."
"Why did the United States have secret foreign prisons in the first place?"
asked Lipman. "Why didn't we house captives domestically, or at least
openly, which would have taken much less effort and expense? Sadly, the
first reason that occurs to any reasonable person is that the government has
something to hide."
