--- Bryon Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The article states "Left with him were two AK-47 > assault guns and a pistol". > I haven't seen anything about this and even read a > bried blurb about one > of the Iraqi CPA leaders asking Saddam why he didn't > use his pistol (I don't > remember the exact reply, but it wasn't "I didn't > have a pistol"). Do you > have a link to any news articles about him having no > pistol?
His reply was, wonderfully enough, to point to a nearby American soldier and ask, "Would you fight them?" > You seem to be assuming that "hard" interrogation > means torture. Do you > think that there are no acceptable strong means of > interrogation that don't > involve torture? > > -Bryon In fact it appears that we conducted the interrogation and we are legally unable to use torture. A prohibition that we appear to be sticking to, since the very fact that we need to ship people resistant to less coercive forms of interrogation off to various unsavory allies suggests that we are unable/unwilling to use those forms ourselves. The person involved probably wasn't exactly comfortable, but given the time frames involved, I doubt they were tortured - there probably wasn't time enough to do so. ===== Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
