It is not legally binding, but the committee is the authoritative interpretation of what the Convention means - Reed Brody, special counsel, Human Rights WatchI almost (there is a lot of room in almost), take the stance that even if we were "torturing" these individuals, I don't believe we should go with the recommendations/demands of the UN Committee on Torture. The UN receives cooperation from countries like the U.S. often, yet we are not the problem. Iran can respond belligerently as they have been and there is not a whole lot that the international body does or can do. The U.S., the beacon that it is, is labled negatively as though it is the equivalent of Josef Stalin's Soviet Union, Nazi brownshirts or Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge; thanks accurate assessment Dickie D.
That august body as urged President Bush to "ban interrogation methods that could be regarded as torture or cruel treatment."
I think it would be naive to assume, there have been no "acts of abuse in the past," but to turn this into the circus it is, is one of the more inexcusable activities since 9/11.
The only "torture," that has taken place is the "torture" of just what "torture" or "cruel" is.
tag: torture and abuse tag: Guantanamo Bay tag: UN Committee on Torture
