posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 12:40 AM
The documents are a smattering of the real stuff, selected as they are the ones that would show a trail of the most plausible defense of the
How the media treat them is of interest, what they choose to highlight and what biases are brought about.
Here are some already apparent contradictions:
"Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's November 2002 memo approved several methods which apparently would violate Geneva Convention rules, including:
putting detainees in "stress positions" for up to four hours;
removing their clothes;
intimidating them with dogs;
interrogating them for 20 hours at a time;
forcing them to wear hoods;
shaving their heads and beards;
using "mild, non-injurious physical contact" such as prodding.
Less than two months later, Mr Rumsfeld withdrew approval for those methods, reportedly on advice from military lawyers. He appointed a Pentagon panel
to recommend interrogation methods."
Approved then disapproved... then what, and when, and how often, and by whom? What is not mentioned in these so-called "secret documents" and what
documentation has not been released is going to be of more interest. Already this release is perceived as a self-serving move by a desperate
administration. It won't stop the rot.
[edit on 24-6-2004 by MaskedAvatar]