Here is a survey of U.S. torture tactics used at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and other places in the American-operated Gulag Archipelago.

http://slate.msn.com/features/whatistorture/Taxonomy.html

Here's an article about the U.S. Gulag itself.

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/etn/statements/abu-yr-042605.htm

Even though the Red Cross called American treatment of POWs "tantamount to torture" and evidently part of a "standard operating procedure," and the Taguba report cited "horrific abuses" at Abu Ghraib, the Republican Party denies torture ever happened. This is because the right wing hates freedom and truth, and has no morals or principles that they won't discard in the blink of an eye.

[Greyhawk notes: For more on the Taguba report see here. Key quote from Taguba: "We did not find any evidence of a policy or a direct order given to these soldiers to conduct what they did. I believe that they did it on their own volition and I believe that they collaborated with several MI (military intelligence) interrogators at the lower level," Tugaba said. Now back to Willy]

The party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt is now become the party of torture and lies. It's a sad day for America when this happens.

Here is an outstanding article about the damage the U.S. military has done not only to our national honor, image and reputation abroad, but to our national soul at home, by going along with White House orders to have its soldiers torture POWs. It has already turned the dominant political party into the pro-torture party, and that's worrisome to put it mildly.

http://www.markdanner.com/interviews/120704_torture.htm

EXCERPTS:

One of the remarkable things about this whole affair is that it's been spectacular propaganda damage to the United States. It supplied a brand image for American repression: I'm talking about the hooded-man image, which now is recognizable all over the Middle East and the Islamic world as a symbol of the United States and the horrors it inflicts on Muslims. Osama bin Laden, had he gone to Madison Avenue and asked for an advertising image for jihad -- even the best firm couldn't have come up with anything better than those images. ...

You have this panoply of euphemism in which procedures that are painful, psychologically damaging, and physically debilitating are described in ways that suggest they are not harmful and they're simply "enhanced interrogation techniques." Some of the news media have adopted these euphemisms and refuse to call things what they are. It's a general harshening of the public perception and the public sensitivity to what should be an appreciation for human rights. ...

I was talking really about a kind of moral defeat. It's become a kind of cliché that, if in the struggle against terror, we forget our values, the terrorists will have been victorious. My question is, what do we mean by this? What exactly would constitute our having lost this battle and making changes in the way we live and our attitudes towards human rights and civil liberties that would actually constitute a kind of defeat? It's hard to think of something more obvious than American troops and American intelligence officers torturing prisoners. And doing it not only as an act of desperation in the field, but doing it as a matter of policy which has been developed at the highest level of the administration. My question is, when we say the terrorists cause us to dispense with our values -- our belief in human rights, our adherence to laws we have passed that commit the U.S. not to torture -- if we have abrogated those, doesn't that constitute the victory of the other side that we talk about?