RINF.COM : THE BREAKING NEWS ALTERNATIVE rinf.com ：突發新聞的替代 Wednesday, June 11th, 2008週三， 2008年6月11日 |  |
Breaking News 突發新聞 | | Forum 論壇 | | UK News 英國新聞 | | USA News 美國新聞 | | World News 世界新聞 | | Political News 政治新聞 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新聞 | | War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 | | Sports News 體育新聞 | | Multimedia 多媒體 | | Set Homepage 設為首頁 | |
BREAKING NEWS 突發新聞 |
Bush’s Torture Quote Undercuts Denial布什的酷刑引述削弱否認 Tuesday, April 15th, 2008 週二， 2008年4月15日 By Jason Leopold由Jason利奧波德 President George W. Bush’s comment to ABC News – that he approved discussions that his top aides held about harsh interrogation techniques – adds credence to claims from senior FBI agents in Iraq in 2004 that Bush had signed an Executive Order approving the use of military dogs, sleep deprivation and other tactics to intimidate Iraqi detainees.布什總統評論，以ABC新聞-他批准的討論，他的高級助手舉行了約嚴酷的審問技巧-添加輕信索賠由資深聯邦調查局特工在伊拉克於2 0 04年，布什簽署了一項行政命令，批准使用軍隊狗，剝奪睡眠和其他手段，恐嚇伊拉克囚犯。 When the American Civil Liberties Union released the FBI e-mail in December 2004 – after obtaining it through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit – the White House emphatically denied that any such presidential Executive Order existed, calling the unnamed FBI official who wrote the e-mail “mistaken.”當美國公民自由聯盟公佈的聯邦調查局電子郵件在2004年12月-後獲得通過資訊自由法的訴訟-白宮強調，否認有任何這樣的總統行政命令存在，呼喚著無名聯邦調查局官員誰寫電子商務郵件“錯誤” 。 President Bush and his representatives also have denied repeatedly that the administration condones “torture,” although senior administration officials have acknowledged subjecting “high-value” terror suspects to aggressive interrogation techniques, including the “waterboarding” – or simulated drowning – of three al-Qaeda detainees.布什總統和他的代表也都否認一再表示，政府當局縱容“酷刑” ，雖然政府高層官員也承認受到“高價值”恐怖嫌犯，以咄咄逼人的審訊技術，包括“ waterboarding ” -或模擬溺水-三個基地-蓋達被拘留者。 But the emerging public evidence suggests that Bush’s denials about “torture” amount to a semantic argument, with the administration applying a narrow definition that contradicts widely accepted standards contained in international law, including Geneva and other human rights conventions.但新興的市民有證據表明，布什的否認有關“酷刑”的數額，以語義論點，與政府當局申請了狹隘的定義，這是自相矛盾的廣泛接受的標準載於國際法律，包括日內瓦和其他人權公約。 The FBI e-mail – dated May 22, 2004 http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/FBI.121504.4940_4941.pdf– followed disclosures about abuse of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison and sought guidance on whether FBI agents in Iraq were obligated to report the US military’s harsh interrogation of inmates when that treatment violated FBI standards but fit within the guidelines of a presidential Executive Order.聯邦調查局電子郵件-日期2 004年5月2 2日h ttp://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/fbi.121504.4940_4941.pdf-其次是披露的有關虐待伊拉克關押在阿布格萊布監獄，並要求指導就是否聯邦調查局特工在伊拉克有義務報告，美軍的嚴酷的審問犯人時，違反了美國聯邦調查局的待遇標準，但符合該指引的總統行政命令。 According to the e-mail, Bush’s Executive Order authorized interrogators to use military dogs, “stress positions,” sleep “management,” loud music and “sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc.” to extract information from detainees in Iraq.據電子郵件，布什的行政命令，授權審訊人員使用軍犬“ ，強調的立場， ”睡眠“管理” ，嘈雜的音樂和“感覺剝奪通過使用頭套等”提取信息從被拘留伊拉克。 The FBI e-mail was put into a new light by news reports last week that senior White House officials – including Vice President Dick Cheney and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice – did meet secretly to discuss specific interrogation methods that could be used against detainees.聯邦調查局電子郵件投入一個新的輕，由新聞報導，上週，白宮高級官員-包括副總統切尼和當時的國家安全顧問賴斯-沒有滿足秘密討論具體的審訊方法，可用於對被拘留者。 “The most senior Bush administration officials repeatedly discussed and approved specific details of exactly how high-value al-Qaeda suspects would be interrogated by the CIA,” ABC News reported “最高級布什政府官員多次討論和批准的具體細節究竟如何高價值的蓋達組織嫌疑人將審問，由中央情報局， ” ABC新聞報導 http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/LawPolitics/Story?id=4635175&page=1 http://abcnews.go.com/thelaw/lawpolitics/story?id=4635175&page=1 , citing unnamed sources.引述不具名消息來源。 “The high-level discussions about these ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ were so detailed, these sources said, some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed – down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic. “高級別討論這些增強的審訊技術'這麼詳細，這些消息人士說，一些訊問會議幾乎編舞-下降到多少次，中央情報局特務可以使用一個特定的策略。 “These top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate top al-Qaeda suspects – whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding, sources told ABC News.” “這些高級顧問簽署的小康就如何中央情報局將審問頂端蓋達組織嫌疑人-他們是否會掌摑，推，他被剝奪睡眠，或遭到模擬溺水，所謂w aterboarding，消息來源告訴美國廣播公司新聞” 。 On Friday, President Bush confirmed the report, stating matter-of-factly: “I’m aware our national security team met on this issue.上週五，美國總統布什證實的報告，說明此事-實事求是地說： “我知道我們的國家安全團隊會面，在這個問題上。 And I approved”我和批准了“ FBI E-Mail聯邦調查局電子郵件 The May 2004 FBI e-mail stated that the FBI interrogation team in Iraq understood that despite revisions in the Executive Order that occurred after the furor over the Abu Ghraib abuses, the presidential sanctioning of harsh interrogation tactics had not been rescinded. 2004年5月，聯邦調查局電子郵件指出，美國聯邦調查局審訊小組在伊拉克的理解，儘管在修改行政命令發生後，憤怒超過阿布格萊布虐待，總統制裁嚴酷的審問策略尚未撤銷。 “I have been told that all interrogation techniques previously authorized by the Executive Order are still on the table but that certain techniques can only be used if very high-level authority is granted,” the author of the FBI e-mail said. “有人告訴我，所有的審訊手段以前核准的行政命令是仍然擺在桌上，但某些技術只能用於如果非常高層次的權力是理所當然的， ”作者聯邦調查局電子郵件說。 “We have also instructed our personnel not to participate in interrogations by military personnel which might include techniques authorized by Executive Order but beyond the bounds of FBI practices.” “我們也指示我們的人員不參加在盤問軍事人員，其中可能包括技術授權的行政命令，但超越的界限，美國聯邦調查局的做法” 。 One month after the e-mail was sent to FBI counterterrorism officials in Washington, then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales held a news conference in an attempt to contain the fallout from the Abu Ghraib scandal.一個月後，電子郵件被送往聯邦調查局的反恐官員在華盛頓，當時的白宮法律顧問岡薩雷斯舉行的新聞發布會上，在企圖遏制塵從阿布格萊布醜聞。 Gonzales told reporters that the abuses, which included sexual humiliation of Iraqi men, were isolated to some rogue US soldiers who acted on their own and not as result of orders being handed down from high-level officials inside the Bush administration.岡薩雷斯對記者說，虐待，其中包括性羞辱伊拉克男子，被孤立的一些無賴的美軍士兵誰擔任他們自己而不是作為結果的訂單正在從傳世的高級別官員內，布什政府。 “The President has not directed the use of specific interrogation techniques,” Gonzales said on June 22, 2004. “總統已經不針對使用特定的審訊手段， ”岡薩雷斯說，對2004年6月22日。 “There has been no presidential determination necessity or self-defense that would allow conduct that constitutes torture. “已沒有總統的決心，必要性或自衛，這將使行為構成酷刑。 “There has been no presidential determination that circumstances warrant the use of torture to protect the mass security of the United States.” “已沒有總統的決心，情況需要使用酷刑，以保障群眾對美國的安全” 。 Prior to the news conference, the White House selectively declassified and released documents to reporters, including one dated Feb. 7, 2002, and signed by President Bush, that cited the Geneva Convention’s rules about humane treatment of prisoners during conflicts.之前的記者招待會上，白宮有選擇性地解密和公佈的文件告訴記者，其中包括日期2002年2月7日，並簽署了由美國總統布什，即列舉了日內瓦公約的規則，關於人道對待囚犯在衝突期間。 Describing the contents of the Feb. 7, 2002, memo, Gonzales said, “This is the only formal, written directive from the President regarding treatment of detainees.描述的內容，該2002年2月7日，備忘，岡薩雷斯說， “這是唯一正式的，書面指令，從總統關於被拘留者的待遇。 The President determined that Geneva does not apply with respect to our conflict with al-Qaeda.總統決定，日內瓦並不適用於與尊重我們的衝突與基地組織。 Geneva applies with respect to our conflict with the Taliban.日內瓦適用與尊重我們的衝突與塔利班。 Neither the Taliban or al Qaeda are entitled to POW protections.”既不是塔利班或基地組織都有權戰俘的保護“ 。 Gonzales added: “But the President also determined – and this is quoting from the actual document, paragraph 3; this is very important – he said, ‘Of course, our values as a nation, values that we share with many nations in the world, call for us to treat detainees humanely, including those who are not legally entitled to such treatment.岡薩雷斯說： “但總統也決定了-這是引用從實際的文件，第3段;這是非常重要的-他說， '當然，我們的價值作為一個民族，價值觀，我們的份額，與許多國家在世界上，請為我們人道地對待被拘留者，包括那些誰是沒有法律享有這種待遇。 Our nation has been, and will continue to be, a strong supporter of Geneva and its principles.我們的國家一直是，並且將繼續成為一個強有力的支持者，日內瓦和它的原則。 As a matter of policy, the Armed Forces are to treat detainees humanely, and to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva’.”作為一個政策問題，軍隊是人道對待被拘留者，並在適當範圍內並與軍事必要性，在一致的方式與原則的日內瓦“ 。 But the FBI e-mail’s reference to an Executive Order describing specific harsh interrogation techniques, allegedly approved by President Bush, appeared to contradict Gonzales’s assertions.但美國聯邦調查局電子郵件的參考一項行政命令，描述具體嚴酷的審問技術，據稱，批准布什總統，似乎違背了岡薩雷斯的說法。 Yoo’s Memo柳的備忘錄 The issue surrounding US interrogation methods and whether they amount to torture resurfaced two weeks ago when the Defense Department released an 81-page document in response to the ACLU’s ongoing FOIA lawsuit.問題的周圍，美國的審訊方法以及他們是否數額酷刑鋪在兩個星期前，當美國國防部發表了一份81頁的文件在回應美國民權聯盟正在進行的foia訴訟。 John Yoo, then a deputy in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, drafted the document, dated March 14, 2003.約翰柳，然後在一名副司法部的法律顧問辦公室，起草文件，日期為2003年3月14日。 It essentially provided military interrogators with legal cover if they resorted to brutal and violent methods to extract information from prisoners.它主要提供軍事審訊人員與法律包括，如果他們訴諸暴力的野蠻和方法提取信息來自囚犯的。 “If a government defendant were to harm an enemy combatant during an interrogation in a manner that might arguably violate a criminal prohibition, he would be doing so in order to prevent further attacks on the United States by the al-Qaeda terrorist network,” Yoo wrote. “如果一個政府被告傷害敵方戰鬥人員在訊問中的方式可能會說是違反刑事禁止，他將這樣做，以防止進一步對美國的襲擊是由蓋達組織的恐怖網絡， ”柳寫道。 “In that case, we believe that he could argue that the Executive Branch’s constitutional authority to protect the nation from attack justified his actions.” “在這種情況下，我們認為，他可以說，行政部門的憲法權力，以保障國家免受攻擊的理由，他的行動” 。 The legal opinion for military interrogators was virtually identical to an earlier memo that Yoo had written in August 2002 for CIA interrogators.法律意見軍事審訊是幾乎完全相同到一個較早的備忘錄，柳曾致函在2002年8月，為中央情報局審訊。 Widely called the “Torture Memo,” it provided CIA interrogators with the legal authority to use long-outlawed tactics, such as waterboarding, when interrogating so-called high-level terrorist suspects.廣泛稱為“酷刑備忘錄” ，它提供了美國中央情報局審訊人員與法律權力使用的長期策略，取締，如waterboarding ，當審問，所以所謂高層次的恐怖嫌疑人。 In declaring that the United States does not engage in torture, Bush administration officials appear to be relying on a narrower US definition of torture than that is accepted under international law, such as the 1984 Convention Against Torture that was signed by the Reagan administration in 1988 and ratified by the US Senate in 1994.在宣布美國不從事酷刑，布什政府官員似乎要依靠的是一種狹義的美國酷刑的定義比是接受，根據國際法，如1984年禁止酷刑公約，這是簽署了裡根政府在1988年並批准了由美國參議院在1994年。 “The threshold for torture is lower under international law: acts that do not amount to torture under US law may do so under international law,” wrote Philippe Sands, law professor at University College London, in a column published in the Dec. 9, 2005, edition of The Financial Times. “門檻低，酷刑是國際法下的：行為不構成酷刑，根據美國法律，可能這樣做，根據國際法，寫道： ”菲利普砂，法學教授在英國倫敦大學學院，在一欄公佈，在12月9日， 2005年，出版的金融時報。 “Waterboarding – strapping a detainee to a board and dunking him under water so he believes that he might drown – plainly constitutes torture under international law, even if it may not do so under US law. “ waterboarding -s trapping被拘留者，以董事會和d unking他根據水，所以他認為，他可能會淹死-顯然構成酷刑，根據國際法，即使它可能沒有這樣做，根據美國法律。 … “When the US joined the 1984 convention it entered an ‘understanding’ on the definition of torture, to the effect that the international definition was to be read as being consistent with the US definition The administration relies on the ‘understanding.’ “當美國加入1984年公約，它進入了一個'了解'關於酷刑的定義，大意是國際公認的定義是被當作一貫與美國的定義，政府當局依賴於'的理解。 “So, when Ms. Rice says the US does not do torture or render people to countries that practice torture, she does not rely on the international definition. “所以，當賴斯說，美國不這樣做酷刑，或使人民的國家的做法，酷刑，她不依賴於國際公認的定義。 That is wrong: the convention does not allow each country to adopt its own definition, otherwise the convention’s obligations would become meaningless.這是錯誤：該公約不容許每一個國家通過自己的定義，否則該公約的義務，將變得毫無意義。 That is why other governments believe the US ‘understanding’ cannot affect US obligations under the convention.”這就是為什麼其他國家政府相信，美國的了解， '不能影響到美國的公約下的義務“ 。 At the June 22, 2004, news conference, Gonzales said the White House defined torture as a “a specific intent to inflict severe physical or mental harm or suffering.在2004年6月22日，新聞發布會上，岡薩雷斯說，白宮所界定的酷刑作為一個“特定的意圖，造成嚴重的身體上或精神上的傷害或痛苦的。 That’s the definition that Congress has given us and that’s the definition that we use.”說的定義，國會給了我們和的定義，我們使用“ 。 However, on March 8, 2008, President Bush vetoed congressional legislation that called for a specific ban on waterboarding and other abusive interrogation techniques, including stripping prisoners naked, subjecting them to extreme cold and staging mock executions.然而， 2008年3月8日，美國總統布什否決國會立法，要求明文禁止waterboarding和其他虐待的審訊手段，包括剝奪囚犯赤身露體，他們受到極端寒冷和分期模擬處決。 “This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe,” the president said in a radio address “這是沒有時間，為國會放棄的做法有一個證明的記錄保持美國的安全， ”主席說，在一個電台地址 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/ http://www.cnn.com/2008/politics/03/08/bush.torture.ap/ explaining his veto.解釋了他的否決權。 “We created alternative procedures to question the most dangerous al-Qaeda operatives, particularly those who might have knowledge of attacks planned on our homeland.” Bush said. “我們創造了替代的程序問題，最危險的蓋達組織操作工，尤其是那些誰可能有知識的攻擊計劃，對我們的家園。 ”布什說。 “If we were to shut down this program and restrict the CIA to methods in the [Army] field manual, we could lose vital information from senior al-Qaeda terrorists, and that could cost American lives.” “如果我們要關閉這一計劃，並限制美國中央情報局的方法，在[軍隊]外地工作手冊，我們可能會失去重要的資料，由資深蓋達組織的恐怖分子，並可以成本美國人的生命” 。 Investigative reporter Jason Leopold is the author of News Junkie, a memoir Visit調查記者傑森利奧波德是作者的新聞junkie ，一本回憶錄，訪問 http://www.newsjunkiebook.com for a preview.一個預覽。 See More: 看到更多的： Bush 布什 Torture 酷刑 USA News 美國新聞Have Your Say: Bush’s Torture Quote Undercuts Denial 你說：布什的酷刑引述削弱否認 Please note, only selected comments will be published.請注意，只有選定的評論將出版。 Or discuss this report in our new forums 或討論這個報告在我們的新論壇 This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 15th, 2008 at 9:31 pm and is filed under 此項目被張貼於週二， 2008年4月15日在下午9點31分，並提交下 Political News 政治新聞 , ， General 一般 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反應，此項目通過 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 餵養。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回應 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 從你自己的網站。 | Translations 翻譯               Free Newsletter 免費通訊 Related News 相關新聞
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友 Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞 Archive 存檔
|
About 大約 | | DVD Store DVD的商店 | | Opinion 民意 | | Reviews 評語 | | Special Guests 特別來賓 | | Webmasters 網站管理員 |
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. 所表達的意見，在rinf新聞電線和通訊是唯一的責任作者（ S ）和並不一定反映的意見，網站管理員。 RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. rinf.com ：突破新聞與其他的媒體是copyleft的-複製及分發自由。 News Forum 新聞論壇 |
