Justice Department faulty torture justification exposed司法部錯誤的酷刑的理由，暴露了
By通過 Stephen Soldz斯蒂芬soldz | Brian Tamanaha at |布賴恩在tamanaha Blakinization blakinization dissects the letters from the Justice Department to Senator Wyden that were reported in the dissects的信件從司法部參議員wyden被報導，在 New York Times 紐約時報 last Saturday and that I wrote about上週六及我寫的 here 這裡 , and demonstrates the completely faulty and dishonest nature of the reasoning involved. ，展現了完全錯誤的和不誠實的性質以及所涉及的推理。 According to Tamanaha , the trick used by DoJ is to find an obscure court decision and use a distorted representation of what it says to make a claim completely incompatible with that source.據tamanaha ，所用的伎倆，律政司是要找出一個晦澀的法院判決和使用一個扭曲的代表說話是算數的，使索賠完全不符合的來源。 Fortunately, Tamanaha went and read the obscure decision.所幸的是， tamanaha前往，並宣讀了模糊的決定。
DoJ attempted to demonstrate in their letter that whether interrogation behavior violates the Geneva Conventions ban on “ outrage upon personal dignity” depends partly upon why the interrogator is engaging in the behavior.美國司法部企圖以顯示他們的一封信中說，是否繼續盤問的行為違反了日內瓦公約禁止對“ 公認為損害個人尊嚴”部分取決於後，為什麼審訊是在從事的行為。 Thus, actions intended to prevent terrorism are subject to a higher threshold before becoming violations than are those for lesser reasons. 因此，行動意在防止恐怖主義受到更高的門檻前，成為侵犯比是那些較輕的原因。
Accordingly, it might not be an “outrage upon the personal dignity” of a prisoner—for example, subjected to extreme cold, extreme periods of standing, or water boarding—when we have an urgent need for the information, while those same actions might well be a violation if we don’t have an urgent need for the information. 因此，它可能不是一個“憤怒後，個人尊嚴”的囚犯-例如，受到極端寒冷，極端時期的地位，或水寄宿-當我們有迫切需要的信息，而這些同樣的行動可能以及被侵犯，如果我們不有迫切需要的信息。
The problem is, as Tamanaha demonstrates, the decision does not even remotely make the argument attributed to it. 問題是，作為 tamanaha表明，該決定並沒有，甚至遠程作出的論點，歸因於它。 Here is the key section:這裡是關鍵部分：
Benczkowski is right that a judgment about the “degrading” nature of the treatment must take into consideration “all the circumstances of the case.” This is the key point in his argument. benczkowski是正確的判斷，關於“有辱人格”的性質，治療必須考慮“所有案件的情況” ，這是關鍵點，他的論點。 He asserts that the “reasonable observer…would take into account the circumstances surrounding the conduct, including what justifications might exist .” That final clause–what justifications might exist–is what makes the (claimed) urgent need for the information a relevant factor in evaluating the conduct. 他聲稱， “合理的觀察員…會顧及可疑之處進行， 包括有什麼理由可能存在的 ”最後的條文有什麼理由可能存在的-是什麼使（聲稱） 迫切需要的資料，一個相關因素評價的行為。
Benczkowski cites Section 53 of the Court’s opinion for this proposition. benczkowski瀕危物種貿易公約第53條法院的意見，為這一命題。 Here is the entire paragraph 53, so judge for yourself:這裡是整個第53段，因此，法官為自己：
“It is also instructive to recount the general definition of the term ‘inhuman treatment’ propounded by the ECHR, which to date is the only human rights monitoring body that defined the term: “ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3 (ECHR). “這也是有啟發性，以重新一般一詞的定義， '不人道的待遇， '所提出的歐洲人權法庭，到目前為止是唯一的人權監督機構，確定了詞： ”不當待遇，必須達到最低水平的嚴重性，如果它是屬於第3條第（歐洲人權公約） 。 The assessment of this minimum is, in the nature of things, relative: it depends upon all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age, and state of the heath of the victim, etc. The test offered by this definition is the level of suffering endured by the victim.”評估這是最低限度，在性質上的東西，相對的：它取決於所有案件的具體情況，如時間的治療，其身體上或精神上的影響，在某些情況下，性別，年齡，和國家對希思的受害人，等測試所提供的這個定義是水平的深重苦難的受害者“ 。
The court makes it absolutely clear that the phrase “all the circumstances” relates entirely to (and is bounded by) the “level of suffering endured by the victim.”法院作出絕對明確表示， “所有情況”涉及完全（和範圍） “的水平，承受的痛苦，受害人” 。
For Benczkowski to claim that this language in any way includes consideration of “what justifications might exist” for the ill-treatment is an outrageous distortion.為benczkowski聲稱這個語言以任何方式，包括審議“有什麼理由，可能存在”為不當待遇，是一個離譜的失真。
Tamanaha concludes: tamanaha的結論是：
It is disgraceful that Justice Department lawyers would supply such deceptive legal analysis to a Senator. 這是可恥的說，司法部的律師將提供這些欺騙性的法律分析，以參議員。
The bottom line: whether an act is “torture” or an “outrage on personal dignity” has nothing to do with (is not in the least diminished by) how urgently we feel we need the information.底線：一種行為是否是“酷刑”或“憤怒，對個人的尊嚴” ，完全不符合（是不是在最不發達國家減少了）如何迫切，我們覺得我們需要的資料。
We non-lawyers are left to wonder if the legal profession has any sanctions for such egregious malpractice in a matter of such great importance.我們非執業律師是左，不知法律界人士有任何的制裁，這種令人震驚的弊端的問題，例如具有十分重要的意義。
See More: 看到更多的： Torture 酷刑 USA News 美國新聞Have Your Say: Justice Department faulty torture justification exposed 你說：司法部錯誤的酷刑的理由，暴露了
Please note, only selected comments will be published.請注意，只有選定的評論將出版。
ALSO: Try out our new forum (currently in BETA testing) 還：試試我們的新論壇（目前處於測試階段）
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 1st, 2008 at 11:18 am and is filed under 此項目被張貼在週四， 2008年5月1日在上午11時18分，並提交下 War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 , ， 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。
Free Newsletter 免費通訊 
Related News 相關新聞
- CIA torture given legal cover, newspaper says中情局酷刑獲得法律的範圍，報紙說，
- So, what actually is Waterboarding?因此，究竟是waterboarding ？
- Why governments can’t continue to ignore torture為什麼政府不能繼續無視酷刑
- Police inspector used fingerprinting ‘as excuse to rape’警務督察用指紋作為藉口，強姦'
- Bush’s torture ban is full of loopholes布什的酷刑的禁令是充滿漏洞
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
- Justice Department faulty torture justification exposed司法部錯誤的酷刑的理由，暴露了
- Anti-War T-Shirter Sued for $40B反戰的T - shirter起訴美元40B條
- Olympic Torch Back in China After Protest-Filled Trip奧運聖火回到中國後在抗議填充之旅
- BAE Systems To Build Mini Spy Robots BAE系統公司建立迷你間諜機器人
- Aviation companies point fingers over 9/11航空公司的手指點，超過9 / 11
- 10 US diplomats ordered to leave Belarus 10美國外交官命令離開白俄羅斯
- Scholar Says There’s No Freedom of Speech in the US學者說，有沒有言論自由，在美國
- Cheney accused of war crimes切尼被控犯有戰爭罪
- A barrage of US threats against Iran 1接二連三美國威脅對伊朗
- Abu Ghraib Film Obscures Truth阿布格萊布電影掩蓋真相
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞
Archive 存檔