Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (11970)	11/29/2001 3:14:27 PM
From: arun gera	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

>Let's see -- now Capt. Spann caused the revolt by asking a prisoner "Why did you come to Afghanistan?"> Conveniently, Nadine and Blandbutmarvellous forgot to read about killing in cold blood. Look, I was just showing what other news media are reporting. In my opinion, the just response should be - we should allow Amnesty International to investigate. After all there is suspicion of POWs being killed in bulk.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (11970)	11/29/2001 7:57:44 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Well Nadine... I do find it odd that Spann was alledgedly "bitten", as well as beaten and kicked to death. Why not just shoot him? One thing's for sure, we'll never know the truth because "Dave", Spann's CIA partner, would NEVER admit that he was involved in torturing prisoners. I have some doubts about both sides of the story, but I wouldn't discount the possibility that some less than pleasant interrogation techniques may have been involved. But I don't believe they extended beyond slapping and a few knocks up side the head of their prisoners. If this story is true, it display VERY POOR interrogation technique. YOU NEVER INTERROGATE MORE THAN ONE PRISONER AT A TIME. For one, if they are seen as "ratting" in front of their buddies, they can consider themselves DOA once released back into the prison population. It's better to interrogate them separately, and use them against one another to discover the truth. Secondly, you never place yourself in a position where you might be outnumbered by your prisoners. I don't know if these guys were just trying to do a "hasty interview", trying to screen the prisoners for leadership elements, but it sounds like they violated protocol... Again, if the story is true that they were interrogating more than one prisoner at a time. Hawk