Guatanamo Bay

   A book recently published, title Torture Team: Deception, Cruelty and the Compromise of Law, by Phillipe Sands. The book was reviewed in the London Sunday Telegraph by Alasdair Palmer. Here is a synopsis of some of the points raised, together with my comments.

The book specifically deals with the additional methods of interrogation on those interned in Guantanamo Bay. Sands draws a comparison between the lawyers in the Bush administration and the Nazi lawyers that worked for Hitler, his main point is that the Bush lawyers justified their advise by saying it was necessary to protect national security, he points out that Nazi lawyers used national security to justify the "evacuation of the Jews" In my view this is a preposterous comparison, most of the detainees in Guatanamo were captured under suspicious circumstances in a war zone. The Jews were not a threat, and were removed for racial reasons.

It should be remembered that US state lawyers believed that 9/11 was a declaration of war by a new kind of enemy, and that their was a need for changes in the way the American state operates, if it is to protect its people. Many would say, including me that a government that did not take a similar position was criminally neglecting its most important duty, to protect the people.

Sands appears to follow international law's absolute prohibition on torture, but there is a contradiction international law allows the state to kill people to protect national security. So if the state kills to protect national security it does nothing wrong, whereas if it merely injures by subjecting to non-injurious poking, or depriving them of sleep, it does something unforgivable, a result many myself included regard as absurd.