Health workers violated medical ethics when they helped interrogate terrorism suspects who were tortured at secret CIA prisons overseas, the International Committee of the Red Cross said.
The medical workers, thought to be doctors and psychologists, monitored prisoners while they were mistreated at CIA prisons and advised interrogators whether to continue, adjust or halt the abuse, the ICRC said in a report based on interviews with 14 prisoners in 2007.
One prisoner alleged that medical personnel monitored his blood oxygen levels while he was subjected to waterboarding, a simulated drowning designed to induce panic and widely considered to be torture, the ICRC said.
Other prisoners said that as they stood shackled with their arms chained above their heads, a doctor regularly measured the swelling in their legs and signaled when they should be allowed to sit down.
The ICRC interviewed 14 men who had been held in secret CIA prisons overseas before being sent to the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in 2006…
The ICRC monitors compliance with the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of war captives and keeps its reports secret, sharing them only with the detaining government…
A previously undisclosed portion of the report concluded that medical workers who monitored or took part in the interrogations had violated their ethical duty to do no harm, preserve dignity and act in patients’ best interest…
Bush administration officials have said the “enhanced interrogation” of those prisoners produced information that helped thwart attacks but have never provided specifics.
Politicians defending torture now fight to keep the truth under wraps.
Don’t waste too much time distracted by the barrage of rationales. There is only one question under consideration – and that will be judged by the record. When the records are allowed into the light of day.
PaddyO, the answer is known by Fusion as well, but you have fallen into his never-ending game.
# 21 MikeN said, “PaddyO, the answer is known by Fusion as well, but you have fallen into his never-ending game.”
Sometimes I’m not sure. He really might be retarded…
Can you imagine what the “mother” of the baby must be experiencing during such an abortion?
Doctor: “Ok, here comes his feet…
Good, got his shoulders…
Ok, now that sound you hear is the catheter cracking through his skull…
Now just ignore the sucking noise as we remove his brain. Just ignore it, don’t have any feelings of remorse or regret…”
#23–Ah Yea==surprised you have joined the knuckle draggers on this one.
My mother aborted what would have been a younger brother of mine. Reasons are complex and layered but “her decision” supported by my father and the docs. She still cries on the due date over her loss these many years later.
Would she do it again? Yes.
These decisions are simple only for the simple minded. Simple or not==they remain the mothers.
To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln: Whenever I hear someone try to defend torture, I feel a strong urge to see it practiced on them personally.
#20, Cow-Patty, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, Phony Climate Scientist, Real Leading Troll Extraordinare, International Copyright Specialist and now World Unknown Geologist.
I asked you to link to ONE case of a doctor sucking a baby’s brains out. You didn’t. You referred to a wackjob North Dakota web site that is trying to prove that the Christian Right is still in control. And even they didn’t link to one case of a doctor sucking the brains out of a baby.
(partial birth abortion)
There is no medical procedure called a partial birth abortion. This is a term devised by ignorant ingrates in order to infer that a medical procedure isn’t pretty.
So please. link to one case of a doctor sucking a baby’s brains out.
It used to amaze me that right-wingers who bleat so much about “getting the government off our backs” were such slavish supporters of Bush’s Big Brother government… spying without warrants, detaining U.S. citizens indefinitely without filing charges, torturing people, etc. — all violations of our Constitution, which they claim to venerate. But they didn’t say a word while Bush wiped his ass with the Constitution. I don’t know whether it was because they were so terrorized by 9/11 that they were willing to throw away their fundamental rights (in which case the terrorists succeeded) or if they really believe that if a Republican does it, it can’t be wrong.
# 23 Ah_Yea said, “…Just ignore it, don’t have any feelings of remorse or regret…”
And, the Red Cross is more concerned about some health workers who might have kept a torture victim alive rather than doctors who suck brains out of living babies?
No more annual donations to them.
I’m pretty sure the Nuremburg trials established that “I was just following orders” is not a valid defense, so even if these doctors were ordered to assist torture, and it seems that they were, they’re still culpable.
It’s a sad day when Americans are in the same league as Nazi war criminals. Thanks, Dubya.
#24 bobbo
Now why am I joining the knuckle draggers on this one?
As you stated yourself, your mother cries every year, lamenting the life that never was.
Why are you so emotionally disconnected? Haven’t you ever wonder who your younger brother could have been, what you could have done together?
Abortion is always portrayed as a simple, quick, get it done and go on with your life without a care procedure.
It’s not that simple.
#30–Ah Yea==Its not that simple. You seem to understand my mother’s sorrow over her (one) abortion. The whole point of my post and your twisting around it is that it is NOT a simple issue for those who engage in it. I assume YOU would make it illegal for mothers everywhere to exercise their carefully thought out options in favor of your preferences?
“Abortion is always portrayed as a simple, quick, get it done and go on with your life without a care procedure.” — Well, not in this thread but most often by those who wish to simplify and demonize the privacy rights of those who “on balance” decide abortion is the right option. Mom had two daughters after the abortion.
I understand completely why certain folks are against abortion. What I don’t understand is how ANYONE thinkis the power of government should be used to coerce their morality onto other people. Isn’t this what “gun rights” are supposed to protect? NO?–Gun rights exist only to protect gun rights?
Silly knuckle draggers. Voyeurs with no respect for opposing opinions nor understanding of their own rights.
Bobbo, on rare occasions you mystify me.
Where in my original post did I mention anything about Government intervention, or make any statement pro or con? Show me.
I can’t help it if you projected your own ideas and preconceived notions on my post.