美國,前一陣子,將六千頁的虐囚資料,選擇性的公布了十分之一.而這些資料一出,就在全世界各地造成轟動,讓大家知道,...美國的人權紀錄.單就敢公布的部分,就是如此的精彩!至於,遮掩的部分,恐怕更是臭不可聞!

Cheney(錢尼) says CIA interrogators were heroes
Ex-US vice-president insists CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques worked and says "I'll do it again".
錢尼說，CIA審訊人員的英雄
前美國副總統堅稱中情局強化審訊技術工作，並說：“我會再次這樣做。”

How to Legalize Torture, Turning to Israel for Inspiration: CIA Cites Israeli Court Ruling to “Justify” Its Torture Program

The CIA repeatedly cited an Israeli high court decision to justify torture, according to the long-awaited US Senate report on the agency’s torture program.
 
This latest disclosure comes just months after revelations that the Obama administration relied on an Israeli high court ruling to justify targeted killings of American citizens without trial.
 
Released Tuesday by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence after months of stalling, the nearly 600-page report discloses new details about the atrocities that took place at the CIA’s network of rendition and torture sites created in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 attacks.

中情局多次引用以色列高級法院決定酷刑辯解，根據該機構的折磨方案期待已久的美國參議院的報告。

僅僅幾個月爆料稱，奧巴馬政府依靠以色列高等法院的裁決證明美國公民的定點清除不經審判後，這種最新披露的到來。

週二公佈的參議院情報委員會拖延數月後，近600頁的報告披露了關於發生在在的2001年9月11日襲擊事件之後創建再現和酷刑網站中央情報局的網絡暴行的新細節。

The CIA’s torture techniques — which included water-boarding, sleep and sensory deprivation, sexual torture, threats to kill and rape loved ones, mock executions, electrocution and medically unnecessary “rectal feeding” — were far more gruesome and pervasive than the agency let on.
 
Furthermore, the report explicitly states that the CIA lied about the torture program’s effectiveness, falsely claiming its techniques successfully extracted information that thwarted terrorist plots, including a fabricated attack “in Saudi Arabia against Israel.”
 
As the CIA engaged in a deceptive propaganda campaign to mislead the American public about the program’s lawfulness and effectiveness, it relied on Israeli precedent as a legal defense.

中情局的酷刑方式 - 其中包括水刑，睡眠和感覺剝奪，性折磨，威脅殺人和強姦的親人，模擬處決，觸電和醫學上不必要的“直腸餵養” - 是更可怕的和普遍比機構讓上。

此外，該報告明確指出，CIA謊稱拷問程序的有效性，謊稱其技術成功提取了挫敗恐怖陰謀，其中包括捏造攻擊信息“沙特對以色列的阿拉伯”。

由於CIA從事欺騙性的宣傳運動，以誤導有關程序的合法性和有效性，美國公眾，它依賴於以色列的先例作為法律辯護。

How to legalize torture
 
As early as November 2001, CIA officials began brainstorming possible legal justifications for torture techniques they were already employing at black sites around the globe, culminating in a draft memorandum described by the Senate report as follows:
 

On 26 November 2001, attorneys in the CIA’s Office of General Counsel circulated a draft legal memorandum describing the criminal prohibition on torture and a potential “novel” legal defense for CIA officers who engaged in torture. The memorandum stated that the “CIA could argue that the torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm,” adding that “states may be very unwilling to call the US to task for torture when it resulted in saving thousands of lives.”
 
According to the corresponding footnote, the November memo “cited the ‘Israeli example’ as a possible basis for arguing that ‘torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm.’”
 
The “Israeli example” was invoked again the following year in an official memorandum to the White House Office of Legal Council to the President on 1 August 2002, which “include[d] a similar analysis of the ‘necessity defense’ in response to potential charges of torture.”

如何折磨合法化

早在2001年11月，美國中央情報局官員開始集思廣益可能的法律理據，折磨他們的技術已經在全球各地的黑點使用，最終在如下參議院報告中描述的備忘錄草案：


2001年11月26日，在總法律顧問的CIA辦公室的律師散發了草案的法律備忘錄描述酷刑刑事禁止和中情局官員誰從事折磨一個潛在的“小說”的法律辯護。該備忘錄指出，“中情局可能認為酷刑是必要的，以防止即將到來，顯著，物理到人，那裡是為了防止傷害沒有其他可用的手段傷害，”他補充說：“國家可能很不願意致電美國以任務的折磨時，它導致了挽救生命十萬。“

根據相應的腳註，11月份備忘錄“援引”以色列的例子“為主張”折磨是必要的，以防止即將到來，顯著，物理傷害的人，那裡是為了防止傷害沒有其他可用的手段可能的基礎。 '“

在“以色列的榜樣”再次被調用次年以法律委員會對總統的白宮辦公室的官方備忘錄於2002年8月1日該“包括[D]。在'必要的防禦”的應對潛在的類似的分析收費折磨。“

Israeli loopholes
 
The “Israeli example” is a reference to the 1999 Israeli high court decision that supposedly outlawed the use of torture — the Israeli euphemism for which is “moderate physical pressure” — to extract confessions from Palestinian prisoners, a longstanding and widespread practice up until that time. The Israeli human rights group B’Tselemcelebrated the ruling at the time, declaring it a victory for democracy.
 
In reality, the decision was filled with obvious loopholes and merely limited the circumstances under which torture techniques could be legally employed. (Israel’s high court is also known as its supreme court.)
 
Till this day Israeli torture of Palestinian prisoners remains widespread and no Palestinian is immune, not even children, who are systematically subjected to solitary confinement, sensory deprivation and stress positions in Israeli custody.

以色列漏洞

在“以色列的榜樣”是參照1999年的以色列高級法院的判決，理應禁止使用酷刑 - 以色列的委婉說法，這是“適度的身體壓力” - 提取巴勒斯坦囚犯，一個長期和普遍的做法，直到那個口供時間。以色列人權組織B'Tselemcelebrated執政的時候，宣布它一個民主的勝利。

在現實中，這一決定是充滿了明顯的漏洞，僅僅局限於下折磨技術可以合法使用的情況。 （以色列高級法院也被稱為了最高法院。）

直到今天，以色列的巴勒斯坦囚犯實施酷刑仍然普遍存在，沒有巴勒斯坦人都難，連孩子們，誰是系統遭受單獨監禁，剝奪感覺和以色列關押的壓力位置。

Last winter, Israeli cruelty reached new heights when its prison services placed Palestinian child detainees in outdoor cages during one of the most severe winter storms to strike the region in years.
 
As the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) has argued, not a great deal has changed since the 1999 ruling due in large part to the high court’s inclusion of the “necessity defense” — a loophole that immunizes interrogators who use torture techniques from being held criminally liable based on the argument that they had to do it out of “necessity” to prevent loss of or harm to human life.
 
Such loopholes have led to absolute impunity for Israeli torturers. Of the more than 800 complaints of torture submitted by Palestinian prisoners since 2001, exactly zero have led to criminal investigations despite the state corroborating at least 15 percent of the torture allegations, according to PCATI.
 
It is also notable that even the CIA methods revealed in the Senate report bear striking similarity to long-standing Israeli torture techniques documented by human rights organizations, among them sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold, confinement in very small spaces and painful “stress positions.” These are techniques that are thought to inflict maximum suffering while minimizing the risk that they will leave tell-tale signs of torture on the victim’s body.

去年冬天，以色列殘暴達到了新的高度時，在最嚴重的冬季風暴打擊該地區的年份之一的監獄服務放在巴勒斯坦兒童被拘留者在戶外籠子裡。

由於公共禁止酷刑委員會在以色列（PCATI）認為，沒有大量的自1999年執政改變在很大程度上高等法院列入“必要性辯解”的原因 - 一個漏洞，immunizes誰使用酷刑方式從審訊被追究刑事責任的基礎上，他們已經做了“必要性”，以防止損失或危害人類生命的說法。

這樣的漏洞導致了絕對的不受懲罰以色列的折磨。自2001年以來提交的巴勒斯坦囚犯的酷刑超過800宗投訴中，恰好為零，導致刑事調查，儘管國家確鑿的酷刑指控至少15％，根據PCATI。

這也是值得注意的是，即使在參議院的報告熊驚人的相似透露，由人權組織記載長期以來以色列折磨技術CIA方法，其中包括剝奪睡眠，暴露在極冷，監禁在非常小的空間和痛苦的“壓力位置“這些都是被認為是造成最大的苦難，同時盡量減少風險，他們將離開折磨搬弄是非的跡象受害者的身體技術。

A ticking time bomb fiction
 
Strangely, even notable anti-torture liberals have been duped into believing that Israel banned torture.
 
US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has cited the Israeli high court decision on torture as an exemplary ban the US should emulate.
 
“The police think that a suspect they have apprehended knows where and when a bomb is going to go off,” Ginsburg told The New York Times. “Can the police use torture to extract that information? And in an eloquent decision by Aharon Barak, then the chief justice of Israel, the court said: ‘Torture? Never.’”
 
According to Ginsburg, the Israeli ruling sent the message “that we could hand our enemies no greater victory than to come to look like that enemy in our disregard for human dignity.”
 
Ginsburg’s takeaway from the Israeli decision is as erroneous as her racist portraryal of a Palestinian “enemy” lacking in “human dignity.”
 
Far from banning torture altogether, the Israeli decision includes an unambiguous exemption for the hypothetical scenario Ginsburg lays out.

一個定時炸彈小說

奇怪的是，即使是著名的反酷刑自由主義者都被欺騙，以為以色列禁止酷刑。

美國最高法院法官金斯伯格曾舉作為典型的禁令，美國應該效仿酷刑，以色列高級法院的決定。

“警方認為，犯罪嫌疑人，他們已經逮捕知道在哪裡，當一個炸彈會爆炸，”金斯伯格告訴紐約時報。 “警察可以用折磨來提取這些信息？而在通過阿哈龍·巴拉克，以色列則首席大法官雄辯的判決時說：“酷刑？從來沒有。'“

據金斯伯格，以色列執政發送的消息“，我們可以交出我們的敵人沒有更大的勝利，而不是來找像我們無視人的尊嚴的敵人。”

金斯伯格的來自以色列的決定是外賣的錯誤她種族主義的一個巴勒斯坦“敵人”缺乏portraryal“人的尊嚴”。

遠離完全禁止酷刑，以色列的決定包括一個明確的豁免假設情景金斯伯格勾畫出。

In the event of a “ticking time bomb” scenario, the Israeli decision states that “necessity defense” gives Israeli interrogators discretion to employ torture to extract information to stop an explosive from detonating.
 
It should be noted that even the Senate report concedes that the “ticking time bomb” so often invoked by torture enthusiasts has no basis in reality.
 
But even if it did, Article 2 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment states: ”No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

在一個“定時炸彈”的情景時，以色列的決定指出：“必要防衛”給以色列審訊人員自由裁量權運用的折磨中提取信息，從停止引爆炸藥。

應該注意的是，即使是參議院的報告承認，“定時炸彈”，所以經常被折磨愛好者援引沒有現實依據。

但即使那樣，禁止酷刑和其他殘忍，不人道或有辱人格的待遇或處罰公約第2條規定：“任何特殊情況，不論為戰爭狀態，戰爭威脅，國內政局動盪或任何其他社會緊急狀態，均不得援引為施行酷刑的理由。“

Turning to Israel for inspiration
 
In a desperate bid to keep the torture program alive amid growing (albeit weak) pressure from Congress in 2005, a CIA official once again turned to Israel for inspiration and a legal rationale:
 

The CIA attorney described the “striking” similarities between the public debate surrounding the McCain amendment [a proposed ban on torture] and the situation in Israel in 1999, in which the Israeli Supreme Court had “ruled that several … techniques were possibly permissible, but require some form of legislative sanction,” and that the Israeli government “ultimately got limited legislative authority for a few specific techniques.”
 
The corresponding footnote adds:
 

The CIA attorney also described the Israeli precedent with regard to the “necessity defense” that had been invoked by CIA attorneys and the Department of Justice in 2001 and 2002. The CIA attorney wrote that the Israeli Supreme Court “also specifically considered the ‘ticking time bomb’ scenario and said that enhanced techniques could not be pre-approved for such situations, but that if worse came to worse, an officer who engaged in such activities could assert a common-law necessity defense, if he were ever prosecuted.”
 
This suggestion was adapted into a 20 July 2007 memorandum authored by then Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel Steven G. Bradbury, who argued that based on the Israeli court case, CIA torture is “clearly authorized and justified by legislative authority.”

談到以色列靈感

在孤注一擲，以保持節目的折磨中存活在2005年增長（儘管弱）來自國會的壓力，美國中央情報局官員再次轉向以色列的靈感和法律理由：


中情局律師所描述的“驚人”的相似周邊麥凱恩修改[提議禁止酷刑]和情況，以色列在1999年，在以色列最高法院“裁定幾個......技術是可能允許公開辯論的，但需要某種形式的法律制裁“，並認為以色列政府”最終得到了有限的立法權力為少數特定的技術。“

相應的腳註補充說：


中情局律師還介紹了以色列的先例關於“必要性辯解”這已經被CIA律師援引和司法部在2001年部和2002年的CIA律師寫道，以色列最高法院“還特別考慮了”滴答作響的炸彈“的情況，並表示，加強技術無法預先批准此類情況，但如果差來差，誰從事這類活動的人員可以斷言普通法必要的防守，如果他曾經起訴。”

這個建議被改編成2007年7月20日的備忘錄由當時首席副助理總檢察長法律顧問史蒂芬G.布拉德伯里辦公室，誰主張，根據以色列案件撰寫，CIA酷刑“明確授權並經立法機構合理“。

Sharing values
 
It should come as no surprise that the US is following Israel’s lead on torture given that the two nations feed off of one another’s atrocities.
 
When Palestinian prisoners launched a hunger strike earlier this year to protest their indefinite detention, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attempted to push through the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, a bill that would permit the force-feeding of prisoners. According to human rights groups, force-feeding amounts to cruel and inhumane punishment.
 
To excuse his demand for the implementation of the excruciatingly painful technique, wherein a tube is shoved through the nostril into the stomach, Netanyahu pointed to US force-feedings at Guantanamo Bay.
 
When it comes to torture, few people understand the shared values that unite the US and Israel better than Rasmea Odeh.
 
The 67-year-old Palestinian American activist was convicted last month of immigration fraud for failing to disclose a 1969 Israeli military court conviction based on a confession extracted under weeks of Israeli sexual torture.

共享價值

它應該是毫不奇怪，美國是繼以色列酷刑鉛鑑於兩國養活了彼此的暴行。

當巴勒斯坦囚犯發動絕食今年早些時候，抗議他們的無限期關押，以色列總理內塔尼亞胡試圖通過推動以色列議會，以色列議會，一項法案，將允許填鴨式囚犯。據人權組織，強迫餵食量的殘忍和不人道的懲罰。

原諒他對實施極度痛苦的技術，其中管通過鼻孔塞進胃裡的需求，內塔尼亞胡指出，美國的力量，餵養在關塔那摩監獄。

說到折磨，很少有人明白團結美國和以色列比Rasmea奧德赫更好的共同價值觀。

這位67歲的巴勒斯坦激進分子的美國上個月移民欺詐而被定罪未能根據下兩週的以色列性刑訊逼供供詞透露1969年的以色列軍事法庭定罪。

At the behest of the Obama administration’s Justice Department, the trial judge barredthe jury from hearing evidence about Odeh’s torture, protecting and ultimately legitimizing Israel’s system of abuse. Meanwhile, Odeh was subjected to further torture, this time at the hands of the US government, which placed her in solitary confinement for twelve consecutive days for no apparent reason until a judge ordered on Mondaythat she could be released on bail.
 
While the depth of collusion between the US and Israeli torture programs has yet to be fully unearthed there is reason to suspect that some US methods were modeled on Israel’s.
 
Since the 11 September 2001 attacks, the US has fashioned much of its counterterrorism strategy on Israel’s decades-long suppression of Palestinian resistance to its colonial ambitions.
 
Invented by Israel for use against Palestinian leaders, extrajudicial targeted killings are now the centerpiece of the Obama administration’s counterterrorism policy.
 
Like its targeted killing policy, Israel has spent decades perfecting torture techniques on Palestinian prisoners, designed to maximize the suffering while leaving behind few visible scars.
 
So, how much did Israel influence the CIA? Perhaps the answer can be found in the original 6,000-page, still-classified Senate torture report that Tuesday’s release is based on. It makes one wonder what is being left out of the public record.

在奧巴馬政府的司法部的要求下，主審法官在聽證約奧德赫的折磨，保護和最終合法化以色列濫用系統barredthe陪審團。同時，奧德赫經受進一步的折磨，這次在美國政府手中，這把她關禁閉，連續12天沒有明顯的原因直到Mondaythat法官下令她被保釋。

而美國和以色列的折磨程序之間相互勾結的深度還沒有完全出土有理由懷疑美國的一些方法被仿照以色列。

自2001年9月11日的襲擊中，美國已經塑造了它的對以色列長達數十年的鎮壓巴勒斯坦抵抗的反恐戰略，其殖民地的野心。

為防止巴勒斯坦領導人利用發明了以色列，法外處決定點清除現在奧巴馬政府的反恐政策的核心。

喜歡它的靶向殺傷的政策，以色列已經花費了數十年完善的巴勒斯坦囚犯，旨在最大限度地痛苦，而留下一些明顯的疤痕折磨技術。

那麼，多少也影響以色列的CIA？也許答案可以在原有的6000頁，仍然歸類參議院折磨報告認為週二的發布是基於被發現。這讓人懷疑什麼被排除在公共記錄。