Andrew Sullivan catches the AP carrying the Administration's water (no pun intended) on torture revisionisms.
Why are they shilling for the Bush administration? Here's their second sentence in a story today:
The destruction in late 2005 of the tapes, showing harsh interrogation treatment of two terrorism suspects, is being investigated by the Justice Department, the CIA itself and by several congressional panels.
No serious source denies that these two individuals were - at the very least - waterboarded. And no serious, reasonable student of history, warfare or basic ethics can deny that waterboarding is now and always has been a torture technique. Why can the AP not use the word clearly in accord with its plain meaning in English? They have to make a choice. And they have decided to enable the Bush administration's Orwellian perversion of the law and the English language. Really: a factual correction is required. This is not a subjective judgment. It is an objective fact.
1 comment:
Just heard an NPR story (Fri AM) on the missing tapes and other tapes that apparently still exist. A long story, and the word "tourture" was not used once.
It's a big bed, and they're all in it together.
Sorry - don't want to be 'anonymous', but I don't have accounts anywhere.
Post a Comment