Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

British academic whose book was used to justify US torture ‘saddened and appalled’ by Bush efforts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-20-09 11:05 AM
Original message
British academic whose book was used to justify US torture ‘saddened and appalled’ by Bush efforts
20 April 2009


Professor Jim Horne is ‘saddened and appalled’ by Bush Administration’s efforts to exploit his book to excuse 180-hour stints of sleep deprivation. Melanie Newman reports

A 48-page Justice Department memo, written in 2005 by Steven Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney-general, and sent to John A. Rizzo, senior deputy-general counsel at the Central Intelligence Agency, addresses “whether certain specified interrogation techniques designed to be used on a high-value al-Qaeda detainee in the War on Terror comply with the federal prohibition on torture”.

It quotes Why we Sleep, a book written by Professor Horne 20 years ago, as saying: “The longest studies of sleep deprivation in humans… involved volunteers who were deprived of sleep for eight to 11 days… Surprisingly little seemed to go wrong with the subjects physically. The main effects lay with sleepiness and impaired brain functioning, but even these were no great cause for concern.”

While the memo notes that there are “important differences” between sleep deprivation as an instrument of interrogation and its use in controlled experiments on volunteers, it concludes that “the authorised use of extended sleep deprivation by adequately trained interrogators would not be expected to cause… severe physical pain”.

Professor Horne told Times Higher Education that the memo understates the differences and he labeled its conclusions “nonsense”


read more: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=406225&c=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC