Would that I could give the benefit of the doubt.  But past events, past Bushie patterns lend themselves too much to the first thought in my mind being ..."for the purpose"...

Depends on what the meaning of purpose is?

These are sorry times indeed when every word, every sentence, every phrase, every clause is deconstructed for weaselism.

Oh, for the days of innocence when we only worried about what the meaning of is, is....

Trust is earned.  Everything that this administration has done regarding this war--from its pre-war exaggerations, its Saddam-9/11-Al Qaeda conflations, even the "war on terror" moniker that it claims legitimizes every action--suggests to me that Secretary Rice's words can only be trusted if we get today's definitions for "tranported", "interrogation", and "torture." 

That's exactly right. It's a non-denial denial, because what they define as torture is some act that causes organ failure and death. Anything up to organ failure and death is not torture according to the adminsitration.

My favorite literary analogies for this Administration's hijinks are "Alice in Wonderland," "Animal Farm," and "1984." 

I think the statement makes more sense read this way:  "The Queen of Hearts declared, 'The United States does not transport and has not transported detainees from one country to another for the purpose of interrogation using torture.'  Anyone who says to the contrary is not a patriot!!  Off with their heads!!"

Just remember, "War is Peace," and "Some animals are more equal than others."

CC

"For the purpose" has the smell of lawyerly concoctions, but it's "of ...torture" that carries the weight.  Inasmuch as they don't recognize a lot of brutal techniques as constituting torture, they can say this with a straight face even given everything else that seems to be true of what transpires in places like Bagram Air Base.

Pixie Dust

It's gone downhill from "it depends on what your definition of is is" to this pre-emptive "wir haben es nicht gewusst - und wenn schon, denn haben wir es nicht so befohlen."

Taking integrity and honor to the highest gutter, this.

Shameful. And I respectfully digress: given the post-Watergate lawyerese CYA, it's not whether there's "truth" but "accountability" instead.

Today's press release from Amnesty International hardly encourages the 'benefit of the doubt'. Here are the highlights:

(Washington, DC)—Amnesty International today revealed that six planes used by the CIA for renditions have made some 800 flights in or out of European airspace including 50 landings at Shannon airport in the Republic of Ireland. The information contradicts assurances given last week by the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to the Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern, that Ireland's Shannon airport had not been used for "untoward" purposes, or as a transit point for terror suspects.

The organization also rejected assertions by the U.S. Secretary of State as she began a four-nation tour of Europe. In a statement today, Ms. Rice argued that rendition—transferring detainees from country to country without legal process—was permissible under international law. Although the victims of rendition usually end up in countries known to use torture in their interrogations, Rice added that the U.S. government seeks assurances on treatment from receiving nations.

“These flight records provide irrefutable proof that the United States is ‘disappearing’ people into secret facilities where they are held incommunicado without charge, trial or access to the outside world and/or rendering them to countries with a history of barbaric torture practices,” said Amnesty International USA Executive Director Dr. William F. Schulz. “Secretary Rice is either misinformed or is part of an ongoing orchestrated effort by the Administration to mislead the American people and the world community. The evidence is glaring – the United States is outsourcing torture and using legal jargon to justify its actions.”

...

The planes include:

    * Boeing 737-7ET, call sign N313P (Later re-registered as N4476S). The largest of the six planes, with 32 seats, is owned by Premier Executive Transport Services, a CIA front company that also owns N379P. N313P has been frequently seen at U.S. military bases, including in Afghanistan.
    * Gulfstream V: call sign N379P (Later re-registered as N8068V and then as N44982): this plane, which has made more than 50 trips to the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay, has been nicknamed "The Guantanamo Bay Express". It was also used in the CIA rendition of Ahmed Agiza and Mohammed al-Zari from Sweden to Egypt.
    * Gulfstream III: N829MG (Later re-registered as N259SK). This plane took dual Syrian-Canadian national Maher Arar from the United States to Syria where he was detained for 13 months’ without charge, during which time he was tortured. He was finally released in October 2003.
    * GulfstreamIV, call sign N85VM (Later re-registered as N227SV), the plane that took Abu Omar to Egypt from Germany after his kidnapping in Italy, turned around and flew to Shannon, arriving on February 18, 2003. The plane's flight log also shows visits to Afghanistan, Morocco, Dubai, Jordan, Italy, Japan, Switzerland, Azerbaijan and the Czech Republic.

 

"for the purpose of interrogation using torture."

Nice to know that transporting them for the purpose of torture without questions is okay then.  

If you want to believe that bimbo moron spoke the truth, come out and stand on the end of the Santa Monica Pier with me, stare out at the ocean and watch the sunrise tomorrow.  The sun rising in the west is about as likely as that worthless bitch telling the truth.

The whole goddamn bunch of these southern traitors masquerading as Republicans need to be turned over to the ICC for their war crimes.

I am curious which of the following people posting here will classify as torture:

1. Sleep deprivation
2. Use of drugs (truth serum)
3. Use of drugs (truth serum) if it is against the religion of the interogee.
4. Having a large dog bark an threaten the prisoner
5. Making the prisoner were women's underwear
6.  Waterboarding i.e. wrap the face in cellophane and pour water over it.

"I am curious which of the following people posting here will classify as torture"

Nothing could be more futile than a semantic debate about the technical meaning of the word, "torture."  None of the things you list are appropriate ways of treating prisoners in our custody.

I am curious which of the following people posting here will classify as torture:

All of them are torture by the definition of the word (Dictionaries are your friend).  There is also an international definition, put down in 1998, which the U.S. has signed off on, and which includes "degrading," thus covering the women's panties thing (what would happen to a prisoner who refused to wear them?  You said "making."  How was he forced to wear them?  Don't strain your little brain too much, now).  

But the larger issue is the slippery slope a nation starts on when it decides to start bending principles to the point where you are trying to weasel on the definition of "torture."  I think our society is much better off staying so clear of the issue that it's a debate we never have.  Ooops!  Too late....    

It "needs to be true"? Grow up.

Why play word games with war criminals?

A statement that needs to be true. Let us give the benefit of the doubt.

Sounds like someone's been drinking the Faith-Based Kool-Aid....

I, too, would love for this to be true.  I don't want my government to be torturing anyone on my behalf, but can we really "trust" the present administration's word on this?  They will not receive the benefit of my doubts again.

""The United States does not transport and has not transported detainees from one country to another for the purpose of interrogation using torture."
A statement that needs to be true. Let us give the benefit of the doubt."

Where on earth do you come up with such nonsense? The facts are now being openly reported in newspapers all over the world. It's only in the U.S. that the coverup continues. There's no longer any room for plausible deniability, let alone "benefit of the doubt."

Here's an open discussion in the BBC World News of the kidnapping and torture of several of the detainees, who turned out (Ooops!) to be completely innocent persons wrongly identified, thus they eventually had to be released:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4502986.stm

Only, it's not "torture", because in a thoroughly Orwellian manner, the state department has redefined the word "torture" not to include whatever they want to do! So, like Humpty Dumpty in Alice In Wonderland "When I use a word, it means precisely what I want it to mean, neither more nor less." "The question is whether you can make a word mean som many things at the same time", said Alice. "The question is who is to be the master, that's all," said Humpty Dumpty.

It's now confirmed that the CIA had secret prisions in Poland and Romania where it held "about 30 detainees, considered major terrorism suspects". "At least 70 other detainees have since been handed over to intelligence services in Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Afghanistan and other countries." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4495730.stm

Why do you think Dick Cheney was so adamantly opposed to incuding the CIA within the ban on torture recently voted by the U.S. Senate?  

It's now reported that after the Washington Post blew their cover the CIA moved the prisoners from east Europe to north Africa. And we now know for certain exactly what kind of torture goes on in those facilities from the eye witness testimony of the victims, which has also been corroborated by FBI agents who have witnessed some of the interrogation methods.

Human rights groups have also sued the U.S. government over the violations of U.S. law over their "extraordinary rendition" policies. The case reportedly highlights the experiences of two Yemeni men who were held in secret underground jails for 18 months without being charged. "During that time, they say they were tortured for four days by Jordanian intelligence services."

You have to willfully close your eyes and pay no attention to all the facts emerging about the worldwide CIA torture network to say something as ridiculous as "let us give them the benefit of the doubt." There IS NO DOUBT LEFT!

Isn't the crux of the problem the reality of what we are doing not the perception of it? Somebody once said your reputation is not as important as your character. Your reputation is what people think you are. Your character is what you really are. So while the Bushies reputation is justifiably in the toilet, this group's character is pitiful.