Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiAsk any reporter who knows brutal regimes: No hairs can be split over torture. Victims see no ambiguity. The memory stays fresh all their lives. More than pain, they recall smoldering contempt for their torturers.
You might have asked Baudouin Kayembe, the courageous owner of a weekly paper who helped me when I covered the Congo in the 1960s. But he died from his torture.
Over 40 years, Baudouin's intimates never forgave Mobutu Sese Seko, the man responsible, nor American authorities who kept Mobutu in power.
I saw this repeatedly in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. But nothing made the point like Argentina's "guerra sucia," its dirty war on terror.
Government goons particularly favored "el submarino." They held suspects' faces underwater until lungs nearly burst. Sometimes they waited too long.
As is usually the case with torture, it backfired. Little useful intelligence was gained. Survivors talked to anyone who would listen. Decent societies reacted. And it took Argentina decades to live it down.
Each time I interviewed victims, hearing their bitter words and watching their hands shake, I felt a flash of gratitude for the blue passport in my left pocket. We Americans reviled torture, as individuals and as a nation. When it was exposed, we reacted. Torture was one reason we invoked for overturning Saddam Hussein.
Today, we Americans have come up with "waterboarding," which sounds like a fraternity prank. It is el submarino: cruel and, for a people that respects itself, unusual.
Obviously, we are a far cry from an Argentine military which put thousands to death in a long nightmare of official terror. But what are we prepared to accept?
Our justification is the same that was used in Argentina: What Dick Cheney calls harsh interrogation is needed to protect innocent people from terrorism. Our government contracts some of this harsh interrogation to private mercenaries who pledge no allegiances. Not even the Argentines did that.
George W. Bush denies that we torture, which adds hypocrisy to our sins. His attorney general refuses to call waterboarding torture and won't rule out its use.
Whatever Americans may think, judgment elsewhere is plain. When our highest authorities excuse torture - even applaud it - it is no surprise that terrorist ranks swell, and so many people loathe us.
Even if torture did provide useful information, what is the longer term cost? By employing such terror ourselves, we lose claim to a higher moral plane.
Not long ago, I was on a Tufts University panel with a retired white South African police colonel and an African National Congress leader he used to torture. Both agreed: brutal methods eroded the policeman's humanity while it fortified the activist's resolve. The torturers lost in the end.
The debate goes on and on. I just heard Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court on National Public Radio evoke the ticking-bomb conundrum. What if a suspect has knowledge that could save many lives? Extreme methods might help in specific cases.
That's fine for a law school hypothesis, others argued, but it does not work that way. Police don't know what a suspect can tell them - or whether he is lying to escape torture.
Authorities insist that exceptional measures are reserved for very specific instances. But once torture is permitted, it becomes generalized.
For anyone not clear whether something is torture, here is a simple test: Try it. Not under controlled circumstances, when you know that it will stop. Try it for real. Find some sadist accountable to no one. Stick with it long enough to see the irrelevance of sterile debate at a safe distance. Does water actually enter the lungs? Does it matter?
What defines torture is the inner damage it causes - the indelible mark on mental circuitry.
Terrorists are out there, and we have to thwart them. This takes intelligence in all of its meanings. We need police work and tough punishment when justified. But we also must understand human reality.
If we act blindly, brushing aside perceived injustices that underpin terrorism, we face growing ranks of enemies desperate to make us pay in some dramatic fashion. If we fight evil with inhumanity, what does that make us?
Mort Rosenblum, former editor of the International Herald Tribune, is the author, most recently, of "Escaping Plato's Cave: How America's Blindness to the Rest of the World Threatens Our Survival."
Copyright © 2008 The International Herald Tribune
31 Comments so far
Show AllMort!
By all that's Good, True, Holy and Righteous, My Man, it's great to see you on this wonderful Web site.
You and I have met and have something significant in common. But I'd be dead meat, burnt toast and chopped liver if I identified myself in public, sorry.
Apparently, with appropriate clues and aphorisms, I can apply my aptitude without apology, and with your appetite for a mental challenge and your lack of apathy, you'll figure it out.
GOD BLESS YOU, Mort, for the article above, and for speaking out repeatedly _ I've seen many of your articles _ on behalf of a bunch of others in a changing, and heartbreaking, situation. I sure wish we could speak again directly, I'll ask around. You are a magnificent example, Sir. Keep the Faith. We love you.
"A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals." Fyodor Dostoevsky
Tax breaks for the rich, breaking the backs of the poor, torturing the indigent.... Hurray for the USA!
> The only thing I ever heard McCain say was he condemned it as torture
> and condemned any form of torture. Has he said something I missed?
McCain's decided that what the military cannot do, is perfectly OK for the CIA to do.
To state the obvious, it's a distinction that means nothing. We'd hardly be impressed by Al Qaida telling us "our military group didn't torture that girl, we used our intelligence group instead".
It's a recent development because the Democrats are trying to extend the US military's prohibition against torture beyond the military.
Yes, he has said something you must have missed. He's
with the Bush camp on torture now.
Of course Water Boarding is torture. Any one that says it isn't never faced an armed enemy.
Bush and the Boys have once again disgraced us.
"John Madman McCain was against torture before he was for it."
The only thing I ever heard McCain say was he condemned it as torture and condemned any form of torture.
Has he said something I missed?
Second, when anyone, anywhere, for whatever reason is tortured, our common humanity is debased.
Hence my username.
Does Scalia know of hidden bombs? Maybe he could be tricked into thinking twice in one day; that would be torture enough.
Americans have dismissed their victory in genocide, Cherokee (et al) broken treaties, slavery, Napoleon land grabs, etc, etc...
Now you want the high ground? Tell that to Senator Rockefeller, whose family murdered the miners, women, and children in Ludlow, Colorado for profit! Long time ago, but they remember how they got away with it, and are still getting away with it! Now Mr. Rockefeller claims the Senate Chair on Intelligence (abdicated by bought & paid for Roberts). Laborers work or else!
No? Allow illegal immigration, the new throw away people, still getting away with it!
Torture? It's the American way...
Ameica is a fasict country. no democracy thru represetation.
Terrorists are out there, and we have to thwart them.
Ever thought to question why there is terrorism? Just sprang up out of no where? They hate us because? We are free?
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/feb2008/tort-f21.shtml
Moving on I have a couple of quotes from that most odious of Supremely Corrupt Justice Scalia:
Scalia disagreed. Referring to "so-called torture," he said, "Smacking someone in the face to find out where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles" is not prohibited by the Constitution. In arguing that the Constitution allowed for torture, Scalia was making clear that he considered the practice acceptable for all prisoners, whether or not they are US citizens.
"It would be absurd to say that you cannot use something under the fingernails, smack him in the face, it would be absurd to say you couldn't do that," Scalia responded. He added, "I certainly know you can't come in smugly and with great self-satisfaction and say 'Oh, it's torture and therefore it's no good.'"
Way to tell it BaliTwilight.
Shortly after the madness began, the esteemed conductor Pierre Boulez was hauled out of his rooms in the middle of the night as a suspected terrorist. It seems that 20 or 30 years before, Boulez had expressed his opinion that "all opera houses should be blown up". What sort of a pinhead would ever construe those words as malicious. It's mind-boggling. Anyone of lesser stature would be renditioned and made to talk.
Since I am a coward, I know that as soon as the torturer comes towards me I'm going to start singing like a canary. I will tell them anything they want to hear, whether it is true or not. Just please don't pull my fingernails out.
The reliability of any of my statements would be zero. So it must be for any one who finds themselves on the wrong end of a pair of pliers. Evidence gained by torture has no value.
If things keep up like this then standard American army issue will soon include an M14, mess kit, and dental tools. I suppose it's the only way to make us safe.
Here is an idea for a new reality TV show, 'American gladiator on the rack.' Bring it on!
As for Scalia, in a perfect world, Themis would cleave the head off that abomination.
vilander: why isn't the difference between thousands and millions obvious to you?
vinlander February 21st, 2008 2:17 pm
"Obviously, we are a far cry from an Argentine military which put thousands to death in a long nightmare of official terror." That isn't obvious to me.
balitwilight;
You missed the other scenerio with Mr. X. He is the terrorist that knows where the bomb is, knows when it's going to detonate, and gives information that drives people not away from the ticking bomb, but towards it.
Speaking of American Values, they now include TORTURE. It's that simple, don't deny it because you can't.
Its not only would-be torturers who might feel a personal moral obligation to break the law in certain circumstances. Life is full of choices and the law is not our only guide, nor are principles like "do no harm" or "avoid violence". The founding fathers committed violent treason against Britain, for instance. On 9/11 real persons faced a real prospect of deciding whether to shoot down a hijacked plane full of innocent people or to risk its diving into the Capitol Building in DC. Many patriotic Americans, especially in the civil rights era, made what they felt was a moral choice to break the law for what they perceived as a greater good.
That doesn't mean we should not have laws, e.g., laws against treason, trespassing, torture, or shooting down civilian aircraft. When you make a choice to break such a law, following your own judgment, you should also be prepared to face the legal consequences, whether or not your judgment was flawed.
The Jack Bauer (Antonin Scalia?) types can still make an individual extra-legal choice to torture someone to save lives, sacrificing themselves and their victim for what they perceive to be the greater good. If the ticking time bomb scenario ever does happen in the real world (which I doubt) then i hope some patriot steps forward to stop it, regardless of the personal risk. They can make that choice, but they should also face the consequences-- experience suggests that usually they will be wrong and they won't get any useful information or save any lives. Then they should go to jail for a long time. Its not a reason to avoid having a law. When Scalia cites the 'ticking time bomb' scenario he is failing to demarcate the domain in which laws are formulated and justified, based (in our society) on the rights enshrined in the constitution, and the domain of personal choices. He should know better.
Just a thought.
Ah yes, The Ticking Time Bomb. America does love its Jack Bauer our-actions-have-no-reaction ethics. The fact that Justice Antonin Scalia cited this exposes him for the mealybrained, dangerous, authoritarian hack that he has always been.
This is the logic of Ticking Time Bomb: 1) Mr. X knows Y. 2) By torturing Mr. X, we will know Y too. 3) By knowing Y, we can save many lives 4) Therefore saving many lives was worth torturing Mr. X. QED.
Here are some inconvenient questions (one well-noted by the author) How do we *know* that Mr. X knows Y? If we can assume we know so certainly (which is the premise), then why can't we just cut out the propositional middleman, assume that we know Y already - and not have to torture?
...so, Mr. Scalia (and friends), I'll see you 1 hypothetical and raise you 3 (drum roll...)
- What if Mr. X is an innocent man. What if we torture him and OUR TORTURE makes Mr. X so embittered and despairing that he starts a plot to blow up Phoenix AZ: sacrifices his broken life to be the man who detonates the nuke. How's that hypothetical Mr. Scalia?
- What if we torture Mr. X and, wanting the pain to stop, he makes up a story - any story. This story becomes "intelligence" that misleads the blundering USA into invading a country, thereby taking its eye off that small group of determined unsmiling men in a corner of Have-Nuke-Istan - that little group who next turn up in downtown Manhattan with a ...Ticking Time Bomb (nuclear)? How's that hypothetical Mr. Scalia?
- What if we torture Mr. X, and the world becomes so enraged that 1 million more young men are ready, and will do anything in their power to lay their hands on... a ticking Time Bomb (thermonuclear). How's that hypothetical Mr. Scalia, you authoritarian idiot?
"Our enemies...never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
~George W. Bush
Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it.
~Noam Chomsky
Forgot to add March 07 in occupation counting and yes:
kivals February 21st, 2008 2:06 pm
John Madman McCain was against torture before he was for it.
-
Funny stuff. McCain reminds me of Dole in 96 against Clinton.
Yes, breath control is torture. Used as an interrogation tool it's useless. In the bedroom, or suitably equiped dungeon room at home with a willing partner it can be fun. Mind you, don't try it without knowing exactly what you're doing, you wouldn't want to go to jail for murdering your nookie. Torture should be kept Safe, Sane and Consentual.
MEL 2004
What the heck, I'm on a posting frenzy.....of course it's torture, and much like Viagra the GOP mega/ultra conservatives enjoy it, bask in it and are probably somewhat arouse by it, which also explains the ultra conservatives homophobia! Thanks GWB, America Loves Torture and yeah, Support GitMo and our Troops. 01/20/09 END OF AN ERROR. BTW Musharaff called, he's support the troops and our global war on terror also, he's having a heck of a time in Pakistan. Maybe CA 21st Rep Devin Nunes, GOP "Party above America" poster child can go on another junket/shopping spree in Iraq and tell us all is good, no problems. Hell, give me two choppers, a couple of Bradley, M1s, Blackwater and a company of battle hardended GI's and I'm safe and no one hassling me. Oh yeah, another great Day in Iraq, freedom still on the march as we approach another March of occupation (03/04/05/06/08 and counting). We should be out of Iraq by March 2009 AT THE LATEST MR OR MRS NEW DEM/GOP PRESIDENT.
As any competent police or military officer will readily tell you: torture as an interrogation technique is the province of the second rate, phony tough, and wannabe brave (reads like a description of Dubya, Cheney, & Co.'s and their myriad creepy minions). Reliance upon torture is simply put, bad statecraft, if the goal of the torture is accurate intelligence.
"Terrorists are out there, and they is us. "
"Obviously, we are a far cry from an Argentine military which put thousands to death in a long nightmare of official terror. "
Not that far a cry at all...what about the hundreds of thousands dead in Iraq? What about the hundreds of "missing" detanees?
First, the bottom line is that to abuse someonw who is under your total control -- that is torture. Definitions which wiggle away from that are bullshit on a waffle.
Second, when anyone, anywhere, for whatever reason is tortured, our common humanity is debased.
As a Brit of Irish ancestry, I have a couple of points to add about things backfiring, or - as the CIA names it - "blowback".
The British army used tanks in Northern Ireland once and once only, to clear barricades by bulldozing them. The IRA got such a big propaganda victory out of that, that the British army never used armoured vehicles in Northern Ireland in such a way again. They also used torture (hooding, stress positions, white noise) on internees for a while, but that too genereated negative publicity.
The Brits learnt quickly, though low-level guerrilla warfare continued in Nothern Ireland for a further 30 years.
Americans are just starting to learn the same lessons.
The Argentines took 5-7 years to wake up to the "disappeared" occurances, so perhaps the author merely imagines that we can do better.
That is, we can react much faster, regardless of how many are stuffed into the hastily dug ditches, as DIRECT acts of terrorism against Americans. At that point, the in-place anti-terrorism laws will have grande teeth to bite back and hard.
Namaste … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … … … … … … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed »
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — ML King
Me either vinlander. Guess Mr. Rosenblum was exercising extreme irony whilst adding that phrase. Though he was deadly serious when penning the crucial question...
"But what are we prepared to accept?"
I want to see him explain himself when he is The Hague. I wonder if they will buy off on the "Waterboarding isn't torture" BS. My guess is no and a long, long prison term will be awarded. I will mark that day on the calendar and celebrate it for the rest of my life.
"Obviously, we are a far cry from an Argentine military which put thousands to death in a long nightmare of official terror." That isn't obvious to me.
John Madman McCain was against torture before he was for it.
Inhumane. Evil. Terrorists.