There is a misleading headline on Amnesty International’s stance on Guantanamo. It suggests that AI has backed off of charges that there is a gulag-style atmosphere at Guantanamo when in fact there isn’t. On FOX News Sunday, AI Executive Director William Schulz said he didn’t know the extent of the abuse. That out-of-context quote made the headline rather than:
–The massive secrecy surrounding the operation, which was what is remark was aimed at;
–His drawing of parallels between the Soviet Union and Guantanamo even as he noted there were differences as well;
–His suggestion that the US might be holding other detainees at other secret locations.
This is an example of lazy journalism. This kind of sloppy journalism is what has caused the Bush administration to continue their oppressive policies in Iraq and elsewhere.
Is there a transcript available?
Here you go:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158626,00.html
Thanks for the link to the transcript. Just as I suspected. Not only is the headline misleading, the entire story is misleading. Here is what Schultz said:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Free societies depend on oversight and they welcome informed criticism, particularly on human rights issues. But those who make such outlandish charges lose any claim to objectivity or seriousness.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Now, Secretary Rumsfeld did, we believe, approve putting prisoners in stress positions for prolonged periods of time, stripping them naked and even using dogs to frighten them.
Mr. Schulz, do you have any evidence whatsoever that he ever approved beating of prisoners, ever approved starving of prisoners, the kinds of things we normally think of as torture?
SCHULZ: It would be fascinating to find out. I have no idea…
WALLACE: Well, wait a minute. When you say fascinating to find out, you mean you don’t…
SCHULZ: But I do know that what you’ve just described, the use of dogs, stress position, that constitutes a violation of the convention against torture. That in and of itself is a clear violation.
WALLACE: If I may repeat, sir, do you have any evidence that he ever approved beating any prisoners or starving any prisoners, the kinds of things we think of as torture?
SCHULZ: Amnesty International has never accused him of approving starving of prisoners. We have never suggested that prisoners are starving, Chris. You’re bringing something in completely out of the blue that we have never suggested.
We know, however…
WALLACE: You just called him a torture architect, sir.
SCHULZ: We know that — I said he — I said that Secretary Rumsfeld authorized — and you just listed some of them — he authorized behaviors on the part of interrogators that we believe are in violation of the Convention Against Torture (search). In fact, his own military lawyers required him to rescind four of the 27 interrogatory rules that he provided.
Wallace wanted to be like Crossfire and engage in combat TV. That’s typical lazy journalism when you don’t even consider how the interview is being conducted. It’s the easiest thing in the world to take an isolated quote like that out of context when you don’t look at the whole interview.