We Are All Torturers in America
As citizens' outrage over the torture memos heats up, and the US Congress is barraged with calls to appoint a special prosecutor, Americans may be about to commit an egregious miscarriage of justice. Republicans have now accused Democrats in Congress of having "blood on your hands too" in relation to the escalating calls to investigate. I would go further: not only do Congressional Democrats have blood on their hands - but so do we, the American people. And CIA agents may be about to be sacrificed to assuage their - and our - actual and associative guilt.
The suddenly urgent calls by our Congressional Democratic leaders, and even by many of the American people, to prosecute CIA operatives, military men and women and contractors who were certainly involved with, colluded in or turned a blind eye to torture are not only the height of hypocrisy, they are a form of unconscionable scapegoating. The scapegoating is political on the part of Congressional leaders, and psychological on the part of many Americans who are now "shocked" at what was done in their name.
Hello America, were you asleep for the past seven years? The fact that the Bush administration used torture has been the furthest thing from a secret. When the political winds were with the last administration, which framed qualms about torture as being soft on "the war on terror", just about every Congressional Democrat fell right into line to accept it, if not cheer it on. Even Hillary Clinton supported torture - right up through her presidential run. Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the torture in closed-door meetings. When activist groups and citizens called for a special prosecutor, all we heard from Congressional Democrats was how they did not wish to spend the political capital.
President Bush hid the torture in plain sight by championing it. Vice-President Cheney gave such explicit interviews about his role in directing the policy of torture that in legal terms, were there a prosecution, they would amount to a confession. Did the Congress that is now so piously calling for the investigation of rank-and-file agents and military personnel express their horror and outrage then? With a very few exceptions, they did not.
Since 2003 it has been fully documented by rights organisations, and accessible to anyone listening, that direct US policy for prisoners included electrodes on genitals, suffocation, hanging prisoners from bars by the wrists, beatings, concealed murders, sexual assault threats, sexual humiliation and forced nudity, which is considered a sex crime in warfare, international and domestic law. Many voices, from Jane Mayer's to Michael Ratner's to Jameel Jaffer's to Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, made similar documented charges. Did our leaders call for investigations? They barely even called for a moment's consideration; tolerating torture - "tough tactics", "enhanced interrogations" in those demonic euphemisms - polled well; supporting it made them look tough in close elections; it was overwhelmingly OK with them.
And may we please look in the mirror, for the sake of our own moral health? How many Americans spoke up when it was chic to thrill to the sadistic soundbite of "take the gloves off"? How many watched 24 without a murmur when the mass consensus was that it was OK - no, patriotic - to waterboard a bit? How many of us (as in civilised societies everywhere when a wind of barbarism is set free) actually thrilled to the sadistic (and sometimes sexually sadistic) soundbites that came out of the Bush communications office: the "special sauce", the "belly slap", the phrase "we have our methods"?
So now the political and cultural winds have shifted. The members of Congress in their courage are now starting to call for investigations. Whom should they investigate? Well, in an ideal world, themselves: by knowing about and colluding with a declared and documented series of crimes, they are legally accessories to those crimes. So there is an element of cover-your-back in Congress finding its high dudgeon at last and pointing the accusing finger at subordinates in the CIA who obeyed orders that Congressional leaders helped to sustain as a mockery of domestic and international law, and as daily, appalling practice.
So we should call for retired General James Cullen's solution. A former military prosecutor, he has been at the forefront of calling for accountability - but the right kind. He urges us to indemnify those lower down the chain of command to get their testimonies, so they implicate the ringleaders; and then the only people who should be prosecuted are, as at Nuremberg, those who directed otherwise honorable men and women to commit crimes - the lawyers, and those who are on record as having given the orders: Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Bush himself. Lay the guilt where it belongs: on Congress; most particularly, and legally, on the leadership that directed this policy; and, emotionally and morally, on our complicit American selves.

Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
173 Comments so far
Show AllTry and sentence all who committed crimes of war, as commonally understood. That would include members of Congress. Give all the same sentences that have been handed out by America to others in other lands for the same degree of involvement. The only way that justice will occur is if those who have been wronged by America came into the postion of power to impose equal justice.
A useful excerise would be to list all American torturers, beginning with Bush and going on down to Lynndie England, give a summary of their crimes and opposite them name someone convicted by America or one of our vassal states and the sentence that they received for a comparable crime.
Why are we just fixated on the idea torture, when it's all just a part of the imperialist sham that has been The War On Terror? If the War on Terror (Freedom?) ends, everything that comes with it, including torture, end also. If we only focus on torture, it makes it seem as if this War is otherwise just. It's like scolding a bully for "fighting dirty" or shaking a finger at a mugger for using a weapon. War in general is dirty. It's never going to be a gentlemanly game of cricket. It's evil, it needs to end, and those who start wars and benefit from them need to be tried, convicted, and permanently removed from society.
The elites didn't commit it in my name. I didn't vote for these people. I did not put them in power, and they have done nothing for me let alone most other Americans. The very people waging war on the Muslim world are waging war on the majority of the American people also. What good will it do to have average Americans wallowing in guilt? They're victims too in all of this. You're letting the elites off the hook by acting as if the people they've been victimizing since this nation's inception are now complicit in their crimes.
Did the people allow 9/11 to occur? Did they decide to go to war on false pretenses?
We now have a pro-capitalist MOR president. Are the people then undeserving of universal single-payer healthcare? Do they deserve to continue to lose their jobs while corporations are rescued? Do they deserve to continue to be displaced, to hunger, to thirst? When you blame the American people for The War on Terror and the torture that accompanies it, you also blame the American people for their own disenfranchisement.
"Women, and 1 out of 47 men, are kinder souls, more patient, not inclined to jealousy, pride or bragging, not selfish or easily angered. Not content with wrong but seeking truth. Patiently accepting, always trusting, in hope, always strong."
Sure, let's put women on a pedestal. You must not know very many of them. Oh yeah, women are NEVER jealous, arrogant, selfish, impatient, weak, or hot-tempered.
I've read this through at least three times, Naomi, and I am still trying to figure out exactly what the American people could have done to stop the ruling Junta from doing whatever they pleased. Is this frustration or guilt caused by the fact that no number of exposes, in book, blog or article form, could cause enough shame to stop the madness? You, Thom Hartmann, Al Franken, etc., etc., did the world the service of documenting the abomination. But to say the American people are COMPLICIT in these crimes is like saying the passengers on the 9/11 jets were complicit in the disaster that followed. Our nation was hijacked in an administrative coup in 2000.
I do not feel guilty. I feel betrayed, and I feel enraged when articles like this fog the issue by dispersing blame across a vast population that cannot ever be held accountable. This turns righteous indignation into impotent handwringing, which is what we are seeing in our Democratic "leadership."
No, to blame the American people for the deliberate, calculated crimes of a few sociopaths and the silence of their enablers and their handlers who had the power, but lacked the will, to stop them, is just wrong. I am more than happy to be held accountable for the consequences of my actions. But Dick Cheney did this, and Dick Cheney should pay the penalty defined in our laws for treason, conspiracy, torture and murder. And then we can go to the next name on the list, until we get to that most profound disappointment of the 21st century, Nancy Pelosi, who was the first apologist to "take prosecution off the table."
120,000 young american pilots died over Germany to take Prosecutor Jackson to Nuremberg (I'm not counting the 90,OOO britons here) and this is just one aspect of the titanic effort of 70 allied armies on the march with their innumerable dead...Do we have no debt of gratitude and sense of duty to their memory? Have we sunk so far that we can no longer stand up against such heinous abuse of power by cowards and feudal profiteers? (What is the status of an 'enemy combatant', if not that of a truant slave...?)...
Shame on America! Shame on Obama! if you do not have the courage of the heritage you are ever ready to tout!
The world is watching (and many of your enemies hope you no longer have that strength!)
She's right folks--and I hate to say it, but "we" have been watching America's Next Top Model and American Idol instead of raising hell when that is exactly what we knew we should be doing.
Just conducted a random check of comments with respect to US national media's responsibility for letting the torture issue be swept under the rug. Now they are all over it. Will the MSM stay the course? Doubtful.
Nanoo
Many very good comments here. I for one doesn't believe We includes me on a personal level. As a Nation however, We will all suffer from the blowback. As Bush bragged he's keeping us safe, in our police state.
Fuck, I wish this country would break up.
The title of this article says it all. Whether we support something outright, or in ignorance, the result is the same. Even if we support the overall edifice that leads to many injustices. That is why 'seeing' and awareness is everything.
It is BECAUSE torture was done in our name, that we want justice in our name.
Our country went astray, and only accountability will reign in our public servants, and deter future abominations.
Aloha, salud, lechiem,
- Tobias
http://www.youtube.com/user/tobiasaurusrex
First: this predated Bush, by many years. Long before 24 and the other tough guy heroics of post 9/11 tv fiction, the "heroes" were beating up suspects to get confessions, prisons were designed to abuse and rape as part of the punishment, vigilante lawmen were presented as heroic when they took justice in their own hands and dealt out justice. "Just" murder, revenge, torture, they have been popular tropes in pulp fiction for decades. Just watch Gunsmoke. It's the same amoral celebration of might as right when it is "our" might and kills "the bad guys". The huge popularity of capital punishment is a clear indication of how much support the torture lobby knew they could count on. Secondly - the Nuremberg trials made it perfectly clear. We are all responsible for our actions. Blindly following orders is not enough. Punishing the commanders alone won't do. Because it won't prevent further outrages. Grassroots opposition to savagery is what is needed - decent, conscientious, morally responsible *ordinary* people committed to the divine duty to disobey when the orders are cruel and criminal. Being a common, ordinary person is no defence in other crimes - it should not be a defence here. Bad orders must not be obeyed.
When deciding guilt for crimes against humanity, it is not just that the White House council gave wrong council, but that they intentionally colluded with the Bush administration to by design give wrong council as a political expedient to serve the desired end.
Again, all people are not guilty, only those in the Bush administration or colluding with the Bush administration to, by design, give wrong council as a politically expedient tool to serve the desired end, and the desired end is what happened, the DLC is pretty proud of what has been done.
Maybe you, Naomi Wolf, have blood on your hands, but this liberal Democrat has NO BLOOD ON MY HANDS what so ever, and neither does any member of my family have any blood on their hands. We were against Bush being appointed. If Al Gore had realized what a terrible bunch was coming into power he would have fought harder for his rights and never gave up, but how could he have known they would have been such murderers. My family and I have all been against the destruction of the environment, the destruction of the family, the police state, the War on Afghanistan, the War on Iraq and all the lying, stealing and torture of the Bush administration since the beginning and have been doing our best to let people know that our country is going in the wrong direction ever since. The whole 9/11 murderous charade was set up by right-wing Republicans and the Democratic Party's right-wing DLC New Democrat moderates/conservatives of our own government to give the public at large a legitimate reason not to be concerned when the new administration extremists started their private mercenary wars for their private profit in Afghanistan and Iraq for the purpose of conquering these nations as well as using up all the money in our nation that supported the public, so that the elite capitalists would be able to sink the infra-structure of the common population of the United States in a bath tub, and the same with other nations of the world, so that the United States and other nations of the world's populations would only have two classes and cultures, the haves and the have nots. It is a DLC NEW DEMOCRAT/Republican War Plan, the Project For the New American Century (PNAC). Neo means NEW. Phil Gram touched off the mortgage and bank fiasco and 9/11 started the wars. Cover up has been relatively simple, since there are so many Democrats in the plan. I hope to God some day each and every one of the members of their evil plan of destruction get what they justly deserve, but apparently Obama thinks justice will be too much trouble. I hope he changes his mind, because without justice, they will have gotten away with what they have done and will be inclined to do worse, like any other criminals.
You know you make a good point that Obama has a very wide lazy streak
("too much trouble"). Either that or he's yellow-bellied sap-sucking proxy for the same bunch who ran the last administration. But he will go after pot smokers. What a total chump!
michael jordan
http://sites.google.com/site/apolloguide/
Maybe you, Naomi Wolf, have blood on your hands, but this liberal Democrat has NO BLOOD ON MY HANDS what so ever, and neither does any member of my family have any blood on their hands. We were against Bush being appointed. If Al Gore had realized what a terrible bunch was coming into power he would have fought harder for his rights and never gave up, but how could he have known they would have been such murderers. My family and I have all been against the destruction of the environment, the destruction of the family, the police state, the War on Afghanistan, the War on Iraq and all the lying, stealing and torture of the Bush administration since the beginning and have been doing our best to let people know that our country is going in the wrong direction ever since. The whole 9/11 murderous charade was set up by right-wing Republicans and the Democratic Party's right-wing DLC New Democrat moderates/conservatives of our own government to give the public at large a legitimate reason not to be concerned when the new administration extremists started their private mercenary wars for their private profit in Afghanistan and Iraq for the purpose of conquering these nations as well as using up all the money in our nation that supported the public, so that the elite capitalists would be able to sink the infra-structure of the common population of the United States in a bath tub, and the same with other nations of the world, so that the United States and other nations of the world's populations would only have two classes and cultures, the haves and the have nots. It is a DLC NEW DEMOCRAT/Republican War Plan, the Project For the New American Century (PNAC). Neo means NEW. Phil Gram touched off the mortgage and bank fiasco and 9/11 started the wars. Cover up has been relatively simple, since there are so many Democrats in the plan. I hope to God some day each and every one of the members of their evil plan of destruction get what they justly deserve, but apparently Obama thinks justice will be too much trouble. I hope he changes his mind, because without justice, they will have gotten away with what they have done and will be inclined to do worse, like any other criminals.
Well said truenorth I was thinking the same among other things.
manning give me a break with your
'A sharp distinction must be drawn between interrogations intended to result in criminal prosecution or punishment for crime and interrogations intended to prevent imminent loss of life and property. Most nations, including the U.S., have a black-letter prohibition against the former. I believe it's yet unclear whether a similar ban applies to the second type of interrogation.'
Should we not pay attention to distinguishing between the noun 'interrogation' and the verb 'to interrogate'. Why not simply put 'tortures' in where you have 'interrogations' in the above? And it is as plain as the nose on anyone's face that not only is it 'clear' but its patently unambiguously clear, with no exceptions whatsoever and in plain, simple language. There are no exceptional circumstances where torture is permissible. And unlike the tragic case of a Brazilian student named Mendez, shot dead by a British anti-terrorist unit on a London tube, a policy of repetitive torture can hardly be an cast aside by the authorities in a similar manner as single aberration or an accidental mistake.
Who believes in criminal law being prosecuted against criminals? The authorities in the USA seem to lock a lot of its population up and to lock a lot of foreigners up too. It still does. Obama is well on the way to doing so in Afghanistan with his NATO allies. And I'd suspect he doesn't want his hands tied either too. Recollect, felons who weren't felons, or other felons who had redeemed their full civil rights were struck off the voting registers at the behest of a party run by unredeemed felons.
Israel instituted torture into its legal system as acceptable for a period. Both Parties in Congress vote so overwhelmingly in favour of this State that should really disturb those who are calling for criminal prosecutions of torturers. Whe Chomsky and others talk about world consensus not understanding how the USA has consistently vetoed UN resolutions against the practices of its ally there does it not seem amazing that US citizens don't pay more internal attention to this remarkable fact. And this in unbridled support of criminal activities as reprehensible and longer standing than those since 2003 on torture policies by the Bush Administration. Where are the voices of American citizens in this regard? Don't they see the obvious connection? You are allied to the extent that both countries in many ways are indistinguishable and what do you expect?
The Attorney General of the USA is obligated to prosecute now! The evidence was unmistakable with that Cheshire cat grin of Cheney on a television interview. I'll never forget that slimy grin while bragging about torture, ever. Like Bush on his knees putting on the role of a mother who had come to plead for her son's life on a death sentence when he was governor of Texas. Anyone else see that? Unbelievable! And so came another cowboy in the great communicators train. He showed little compassion then for the felon about to be burned on death row. He actually laughed, miming the pathetic pleas of a mother who had met her match in the hard line governor who believed the soon to be dispatched son had been tried by his peers and that, that was that! Another time the Pope among many foreign dignitaries pleaded the case of a mentally retarded man, with the same result for the unfortunate man in the end.
Generations of Americans in the USA have been indoctrinated with propaganda distilled through the MSM. The same happens in other countries both about the USA and their own areas. But the image is different from the reality and the countries of Central America and South America have their own images and realities. Naomi in her article has her own ideas of what needs to be done but it is not at all enough. The weapon is the Law of the Land under the Constitution of the USA. No matter how deep or far the web must be spun all those who conducted such policies whether among allies or among the militaries and private contractors, the CIA or in the Congress should be exposed and punished. On top of that the USA should abolish the death penalty and empty its prisons of non-violent offenders and replace them with those found guilty. Plea bargaining is fine as long as it is understood that those escaping jail time are not a danger to society or themselves. Hospitalisation will also be required to treat the sick and damaged and rehabilitation courses should be initiated to try and cure damaged abusers.
Those torture photos and the exposure and contents of subsequent memos didn't surprise me in the least. Nobody should kid themselves that these despicable crimes are still par for the course in the many countries. But it would create an almighty storm in many other democracies among citizens were it so evidently exposed. I am certain there would be strong repudiation an it would be unthinkable that should the USA lead onwards towards justice for its victims that other elites are not deeply concerned about their own hides too. So, there is a lot at stake. Others are watching closely and though media is largely corporate controlled it has its differences from the North American version.
Renditions brought this to the fore in Europe and the more exposure from the US the better to hold leaderships in Europe to account for complicity and high crimes.
Lbanus, take a look at the response I wrote for Ephraim a few minutes ago. It addresses some of your concerns.
I think Ms Wolf gets it right when she says that "only people who should be prosecuted are, as at Nuremberg, those who directed otherwise honorable men and women to commit crimes - the lawyers, and those who are on record as having given the orders: Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Bush himself." Ms Wolf advocates General James Cullen's solution, the former military prosecutor who has been at the forefront of calling for accountability - "who urges us to indemnify those lower down the chain of command to get their testimonies, so they implicate the ringleaders." From a practical perspective, this may be the best way to get at the bastards who implemented the atrocious policies.
As a veteran of the US Military, I can say from direct experience that it takes phenomenal internal fortitude to refuse an order when you think it may illegal or immoral--but to refuse is also a part of the duty of a military person and we are thoroughly trained to understand that. It is what should keep the military and the political class clean.
In my opinion, the "all volunteer" service, while technologically an improvement in certain respects to the drafted military, has done much to lead to weaken the moral underpinnings of the US Military. But that's an issue for another discussion.
Where Ms Wolf is "exactly on the mark" is when she says, "Lay the guilt where it belongs: on Congress; most particularly, and legally, on the leadership that directed this policy; and, emotionally and morally, on our complicit American selves."
I find it both astonishing and revealing that Hillary Clinton sailed through the nomination process for Secretary of State without even one objection--especially after her vote for and her defense of Bush's war.
Collectively (we're still drinking Kool-Aid) and we are drunk on the fallacy that we are the most important people on the planet. But the plain truth is this: We're still "endentured servants" and "slaves" on Ole Massa's plantation--totally impotent.
Until we DUMP the entrenched political class and come up with a clean set of election rules, implement real campaign finance reform, we'll continue to be an insipid people. We are not the like the Revolutionary Generation. Why, because we're all distracted by the latest "Blue Light Special!" Ms Wolf got it right in her book, THE END OF AMERICA. We are already well on our way to fascism. The Revolutionary Generation gave us the intellectual foundation. We need to become revolutionaries--the problem is we have not the collective will. I'm not as optimistic as Ms Wolf. I think we're finished--have been finished for some time.
"The people are not innocent."
-Lincoln Steffens, "The Shame of the Cities"
I will gladly face the charges against me for my role in speaking out against torture, if those in the government agencies face their charges fully, as well.
Aloha, salud, lechiem,
- Tobias
http://www.youtube.com/user/tobiasaurusrex
Link of a blow by blow account of the infamous man in the hood with electrical cables standing on a box at Abu Ghirab. Horrific abuse to an innocent man.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13379
torture survivors find it deplorable that the miliitary commissions act of '06 still stands.... we need to repeal this act in which:
1. sexual torture is legalized as an interrogation method: forcing a detainee to dance naked, while urinating on her is not considered sexual assault...also forced oral sex doesn't constitute rape under the torture law. the 'law' goes so far as to redefine sexual consent.
2. admission of coerced evidence is left up to the judge's discretion. the military commissions act defines coercion to exclude all manner of treatment, including cuts and bruises as well as anything before the passage of the '05 detainee treatment act.
3. non-us citizens can be disappeared indefinitely: the president or pentagon can declare anyone (other than us citizens) an illegal enemy combatant and imprison him/her indefinitely without ever charging the person with a crime
4. unfair/arbitrary trials may be conducted: this act allows confessions after torture to be considered and bars the suspect from even having knowledge of what the charges are against them, making a defense impossible.
5. geneva convention protections are denied: the mca states that 'no person may invoke the geneva conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas corpus or other civil action or proceeding to which the united states, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the armed forces, or other agent of the united states is a party as a source of rights in any court of the united states or its states or territories'.
6. detainees deemed 'guilty' by evidence acquired via torture can be sentenced to death.
FOR ANYONE SERIOUSLY SEEKING TO PUT AN END TO TORTURE (and not only assign blame),
visit www.torturelaw.org and get involved with or financially support organizations like TASSC (torture abolition & survivors support coalition int'l) at www.tassc.org.
What bunk. Unexpected from such a good observer as Naom Wolfe.
All or nearly all educated people were sickened by and are furious about the American torture machinery, right from the first revelations of it. They WERE speaking out from the beginning. The rulers carried on unfazed.
Further, those who were (and are) actually torturing people - those sticking the electrodes on the genitals, loosing the dogs, stripping and humiliating INNOCENT people - are sick and dangerous for sure now if they weren't before. They must be named, prosecuted, treated, and kept apart from civil society until they are certainly healed.
Being a coward and following orders is not an excuse. Being an ignorant young propagandized bigoted american is no excuse. Even if it were the reality of how engaging in torture damages the perpetrator as well as the victim is not erased and we need to know who these people are and how they have beed affected.
Lastly, prosecution has at least a small chance of raising the awareness slightly of the typical american soldier. Maybe one of them will think twice before disgracing america and disgusting the world further.
Well said, "truenorth April 28th, 2009 7:52 pm"
I was about to make exactly the same points. You saved me the trouble.
As a piece of Eurotrash who pointed this out years ago and was roundly denounced for being an enemy of freedom, I would choose this opportunity to beg you to actually hold these people to account.
You have this power.
As a Brit, we really don't have this power.
If you do, you will not only be doing it for yourselves.
When I first read Walt Kelly's Pogo's words:
"We have found the enemy, and he is us.",
I thought it might refer to looking in the mirror.
Today, two generations later I think it applies.
A thread of torture goes back a long way in history.
I suspect it was never broken completely.
Of late, there has been a public condemnation.
It came with great gravity and universal self-congratulations.
Who doesn't know it's simply wrong and illegal too?
It's quite simple, really. Right or wrong.
Nothing against advanced degrees, but only one's humanity is required.
Our laws, basic, structured, inevitable, should take care of this.
The means and methods don't need invention.
They only need be applied.
We have to take care of ourselves individually and collectively.
Provoke Thought!
This is no longer America. At least the concept of America I was told America was. This is some surreal daydream where we pray at the alter of money and the pursuit of money and consumption. The America I was told about would not even think about torture. I now know this concept of America that I was told about never existed.
Lets say perhaps Ms. Wolf is onto something and there's enough torture guilt to go around. I'd have to say she's a little wrong, because I know some new borns were in no way complicit. Far as the long protesting public, I think she's also wrong about their complicity.
I think the ignorant public, who watch 24, celebrate the CIA and think a little bit of torture can be a good thing, I'd assign them a 1 as a baseline for guilt. The CIA agents who carried out the torture, I'm going to guess most of them were about a 7 or 8 on the guilt scale. I'm guessing some of them enjoyed their work and I'd rate them at about a 12 to 15. The top leadership, who is torturing the world for cash and power and longevity, I'd put their guilt somewhere between 30 and 50. The VERY top leadership, who I'm guessing is just 1 person on the whole planet, long utilized of regenerative medicine, who may have survived millenia and murders daily in the hopes to secure his immortality, that guy, I'd put his guilt for this situation at some trillions times 10 to some other very big number.
Lets say perhaps Ms. Wolf is onto something and there's enough torture guilt to go around. I'd have to say she's a little wrong, because I know some new borns were in no way complicit. Far as the long protesting public, I think she's also wrong about their complicity.
I think the ignorant public, who watch 24, celebrate the CIA and think a little bit of torture can be a good thing, I'd assign them a 1 as a baseline for guilt. The CIA agents who carried out the torture, I'm going to guess most of them were about a 7 or 8 on the guilt scale. I'm guessing some of them enjoyed their work and I'd rate them at about a 12 to 15. The top leadership, who is torturing the world for cash and power and longevity, I'd put their guilt somewhere between 30 and 50. The VERY top leadership, who I'm guessing is just 1 person on the whole planet, long utilized of regenerative medicine, who may have survived millenia and murders daily in the hopes to secure his immortality, that guy, I'd put his guilt for this situation at some trillions times 10 to some other very big number.
To any people who made any effort to stop the fascist crap that has been delivered to US: thanks. Take justifiable pride in doing what you can.
So few in the military and the government have tried. Where are the patriots? No nation can survive when so few of its people care about its honor.
The ultimate responsibility falls on the voters. In the last election the voters had an opportunity to vote for State Attorneys General who would Indict Bush/Cheney. The voters instead voted for AGs who will not prosecute. The voters always get what they deserve - unfortunately many in other countries suffer the consequences.
Friends (Quakers) Committee on National Legislation is mounting a letter writing campaign for bipartisan commission of inquiry and appointment of a special prosecutor:
http://fcnl.org/index.htm
it's haunting how words can echo through time...
from deutschland june 1942 -
the first leaflet of the white rose society....
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/leafets.html
{Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be "governed" without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct. It is certain that today every honest German is ashamed of his government. Who among us has any conception of the dimensions of shame that will befall us and our children when one day the veil has fallen from our eyes and the most horrible of crimes - crimes that infinitely outdistance every human measure - reach the light of day?
If the German people are already so corrupted and spiritually crushed that they do not raise a hand, frivolously trusting in a questionable faith in lawful order in history; if they surrender man's highest principle, that which raises him above all other God's creatures, his free will; if they abandon the will to take decisive action and turn the wheel of history and thus subject it to their own rational decision; if they are so devoid of all individuality, have already gone so far along the road toward turning into a spiritless and cowardly mass - then, yes, they deserve their downfall. Goethe speaks of the Germans as a tragic people, like the Jews and the Greeks, but today it would appear rather that they are a spineless, will-less herd of hangers-on, who now - the marrow sucked out of their bones, robbed of their center of stability - are waiting to be hounded to their destruction.
So it seems - but it is not so. Rather, by means of a gradual, treacherous, systematic abuse, the system has put every man into a spiritual prison. Only now, finding himself lying in fetters, has he become aware of his fate. Only a few recognized the threat of ruin, and the reward for their heroic warning was death. We will have more to say about the fate of these persons.
If everyone waits until the other man makes a start, the messengers of avenging Nemesis will come steadily closer; then even the last victim will have been cast senselessly into the maw of the insatiable demon. Therefore every individual, conscious of his responsibility as a member of Christian and Western civilization, must defend himself against the scourges of mankind, against fascism and any similar system of totalitarianism.
Offer passive resistance - resistance - wherever you may be, forestall the spread of this atheistic war machine before it is too late, before the last cities, like Cologne, have been reduced to rubble, and before the nation's last young man has given his blood on some battlefield for the hubris of a sub-human. Do not forget that every people deserves the regime it is willing to endure.}
IOWABLACKBIRD, Good post. I second PT in compliments.
Weekend demonstrations, writing letters to the editor, sending emails and such to members of Congress hasn't helped one bit. The rape and plunder of weaker nations continue and the death and destruction industry is well-funded by both mainstream parties which maintain imperial armed force abroad in countries which can't defend themselves against the world's only super bully.
Look at the disgrace of our representatives in Wash. D.C. in fighting against Single Payer health care for all, and against the Employee Free Choice Act, making it easier for workers to join or form a union for collective bargaining without being intimidated and or fired by management.
Real change comes with real action as in a general strike of the working-class: i.e, blue-collar, white-coller, no-coller, skilled, semi-skilled, unskilled, professional, etc, meaning anybody who needs to work in order to support himself/herself and/or their families and friends.
The seven magic words the ruling-class fears the most are: "Take to the streets, withhold your labor." (peacefully)
"hope" and "change" is meaningless without concerted effort to bring forth a reversal in the continuation of criminal activity at all levels.
One of the best books I've read in recent years is Michael Parenti's "The Assassination of Jules Caesar," A People's History of Ancient Rome.
I O W A _ B L A C K _ B I R D
Wow, and doubly so, your song is in high form today.
We posted at the same time stamp two expressions of the nearly the same vision, of no longer being whimpered out by shame and fear.
We are the people that we've been waiting for !
¿ Who else in going to be taking back our empowerment ?
Thank you for the powerfully moving words of times not so different than these today.
Namaste
continued...
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/leafets.html
{From Friedrich Schiller's "The Lawgiving of Lycurgus and Solon":
Viewed in relation to its purposes, the law code of Lycurgus is a masterpiece of political science and knowledge of human nature. He desired a powerful, unassailable state, firmly established on its own principles. Political effectiveness and permanence were the goal towards which he strove, and he attained this goal to the full extent possible under the circumstances. But if one compares the purpose Lycurgus had in view with the purposes of mankind, then a deep abhorrence takes the place of the approbation which we felt at first glance.
Anything may be sacrificed to the good of the state except that end for which the State serves as a means. The state is never an end in itself; it is important only as a condition under which the purpose of mankind can be attained, and this purpose is none other than the development of all of man's powers, his progress and improvement. If a state prevents the development of the capacities which reside in man, if it interferes with the progress of the human spirit, then it is reprehensible and injurious, no matter how excellently devised, how perfect in its own way.
Its very permanence in that case amounts more to a reproach than to a basis for fame; it becomes a prolonged evil, and the longer it endures, the more harmful it is...
At the price of all moral feeling a political system was set up, and the resources of the state were mobilized to that end. In Sparta there was no conjugal love, no mother love, no filial devotion, no friendship; all men were citizens only, and all virtue was civic virtue.
A law of the state made it the duty of Spartans to be inhumane to their slaves; in these unhappy victims of war humanity itself was insulted and mistreated. In the Spartan code of law the dangerous principle was promulgated that men are to be looked upon as means and not as ends - and the foundations of natural law and of morality were destroyed by that law...
What an admirable sight is afforded, by contrast, by the rough soldier Gaius Marcius in his camp before Rome, when he renounced vengeance and victory because he could not endure to see a mother's tears!...
The state [of Lycurgus] could endure only under the one condition: that the spirit of the people remained quiescent. Hence it could be maintained only if it failed to achieve the highest, the sole purpose of a state.
From Goethe's "The Awakening of Epimenides, Act II, Scene 4:
SPIRITS: Though he who has boldly risen from the abyss Through an iron will and cunning May conquer half the world, Yet to the abyss he must return. Already a terrible fear has seized him; In vain he will resist! And all who still stand with him Must perish in his fall
HOPE: Now I find my good men Are gathered in the night, To wait in silence, not to sleep. And the glorious word of liberty They whisper and murmur, Till in unaccustomed strageness, On the steps of our temple Once again in delight they cry: Freedom! Freedom!
Please make as many copies of this leaflet as you can and distribute them.}
when the scholl's were executed, what was the perspective of the german student ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose_Society
{Prior to their deaths, several members of the White Rose believed that their execution would stir university students and other anti-war citizens into activism against Hitler and the war. Accounts suggest, however, that university students continued their studies as usual and citizens said nothing, many regarding the movement as anti-national. In fact, after the Scholl/Probst executions, some students celebrated their deaths.}
today ?
{In an extended German national TV competition held in the autumn of 2003 to choose "the ten greatest Germans of all time" (ZDF TV), Germans under the age of 40 placed Hans and Sophie Scholl in fourth place, selecting them over Bach, Goethe, Gutenberg, Willy Brandt, Bismarck, and Albert Einstein. Not long before, women readers of the mass-circulation magazine "Brigitte" had voted Sophie Scholl as "the greatest woman of the twentieth century".}
...peace...
Great post. Those the founded the White Rose had wisdom far beyond their years.
We did not strike. We did not shut down the cities. We did not form human chains across the highways. We did not camp out at the capitol and refuse to leave until the torture stopped.
We did none of the things that citizens of other nations do when faced with egregious policies.
We are, in large part, the descendants of people who chose to come here instead of trying to change things in their homelands.
I do not think we are better for it.
"We are, in large part, the descendants of people who chose to come here instead of trying to change things in their homelands."
Excellent insight. We have had generation after generation of the most "individualistic" (aka "anti-social") immigrants from many nations, those who abandoned their former countries rather than striving to make them better places.
This continued self-selection of the most anti-social elements (united only by the overriding principle of white privilege) have produced the monster than threatens the world today.
CTRL-Z Good post!
We are all too comfortable and afraid to do these things.
If I refuse to pay my taxes, then they will take away my house and my large screen TV.
If I protest, I will lose my job.
So I will send an email to my congressperson so my conscience is clear. Now it is the fault of those who don't send an email.
But what I don't realize, is that next week they will come for me and torture me until I confess that I was behind the 9/11 attacks.
I could not have put it more succinctly, or better.
Great to hear from someone who is not just weasling around trying to justify shopping and watching the boob tube instead of taking appropriate action!
It is true, what you say, and very acutely perceptive of our situation.
¿ Perhaps America is the most "free" of all nations, while Americans are the most disempowered of all nations ?
¿ Why would that happen ?
When I read that sustained FEAR engenders infantilism, running our brains intelligence down several dozens of IQ points ( from mammalian cortical to reptilian brain stem ), which leads to a profound appeal to authoritarianism -- I understood that the war of TERROR, was really a war upon us to instill TERROR, FEAR and HATE in us.
¿ Who or what RULES us ?
We are passive, easily controlled and manipulated, disempowered infants, when ruled by FEAR.
We are active, seldom subdued nor panicked, empowered adults, when ruled by LOVE.
We must rise above the terror and fear, through connection with each other, spirit, and
foremost is through _ L O V E .
[ _____ L O V E _ IS _ THE _ ANTIDOTE _ TO _ F E A R _____ ]
Namaste
The answer is that individuals living in this 'great' country have little or no inner freedom or awareness. We are too stuffed with garbage and: garbage in, garbage out.
I sure do find it reprehensible the way some folks on this thread do their doggone best to excuse themselves from any responsibility for US foreign policy.
US "exceptionalism" at its most insidious.
We can now add Obama's name to the list, as failing to investigate and prosecute cases of torture is itself a crime, both in US and international law...something that I bet the next republican White House in their hypocracy will NOT fail to prosecute...
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
"But I Never Know About The Torturing And The Genocide"
So said the German people about their country's barbaric practices during WW II.
And so say us Americans about the atrocities that our military and the CIA are committing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Those of us who have protested, marched, written, emailed, called, and visited our Congress members since before the Cheney/Bush illegal war on Iraq, and have been outraged about, and worked against, the U.S. Empire since learning about it many years ago, have listened to our consciences and tried to act on our moral beliefs.
What about the corporate media which beat the drums for war and still pretends that torture is "debatable"? War-mongering and flag-waving always gets high ratings and makes big bucks for these "professional" [a.k.a. conscienceless], pretty-faced news readers.
And is it right to immunize low-level soldiers and contractors who carried out illegal orders, actually doing the physical and psychological torturing? Are hit men less guilty than their Mafia Dons? Soldiers have a sworn duty to refuse illegal orders. The "I was only following orders" defense was invalidated at the Nuremberg Trials. Some of them did refuse to carry out these illegal, immoral orders. The fact that so many did not refuse is a sad reflection on our military "leadership" as well as our culture, including shows such as "24".
Justin Frank (author of Bush on the Couch) has a unique take on why Obama must investigate torture crimes.
"...the psychological health of the nation depends on our prosecuting the Bush administration officials responsible for torture. Strange as it may sound, this can only benefit our own collective mental health: our psychic healing demands that we affix responsibility and recognize that, no matter how well we all hide it or compensate for it, George W. Bush’s cruelty exists in each of us."
Why Obama is in Denial (unedited):
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/42069
Hey--if I'm one of the accused, I'm squelching any investigation right here and now.
Why does the left think it's so cool to vent their wrath at others' crimes on themselves? This helps the Right immeasurably.
To hell with that! The Bush gang committed torture, not the Democratic Congress, and certainly not us. Let's prosecute the people who screwed up--not ourselves for failing at sainthood.
Sorry. but this IS America. Always has been, probably always will be. From our birth through this very moment.
Just ask the American indians about it.
The bigger problem is, what can we really do about the never-ending march of euro-centric elites to control humanity, or, are they now in total control?
Otherwise, everything else is moot.
One place to start is pointing out who those euro-centric panderers are on this site.
We are all Saddam Husseins now.
You become what you hate.
"As citizens' outrage over the torture memos heats up..."
Love NW, but, come on honey - look out your window: you see signs of outrage heating up?
The majority of 'citizens' could give a flying f@#k whether 'we' torture(d) a buncha foreigners or not. The tiny minority who do may be 'outraged,' but outrage that does not manifest into serious action is nothing more than a tree falling in an empty forest...
The U.S. is no worse than most other countries. Circumstances like 9/11 severely test the moral stamina of people who in ordinary times would never think of torturing anyone. Add to this the fact that torture is, in some very limited circumstances, morally justified. Everyone discussing the subject confuses the definitions of torture (noun and verb). The matter is not nearly as simple as Naomi Wolf suggests. I've discussed all this at other locations on the site (search for manning120). At the moment perhaps the most important point is that we have no internationally accepted understanding of what circumstances justify methods of interrogation that have been described as "torture," and no internationally accepted legal system for holding accountable persons who torture without justification.
The US is, in many ways, far worse than any other country, because we have actively foisted ourselves as the champions of human rights on the one hand, while on the other, we have codified the end justifying the means by embracing torture as state policy. You can't be, as Reagan regurgitated, the "shining city upon a hill" while maintaining dark, dank torture chambers! These two things are mutually exclusive, as in, you can't be one, while also being the other. And thus, this country is a vicious parody of what it should be. This is not a nation of laws, it is a nation of men, and small men like Bush and Cheney, so easily corrupted by power and their own innate cowardice, soil everything that might have been good about this country. We are all the lesser for their crimes.
And let's just get one thing out of the way, torture is never justifiable, morally, amorally or immorally. Torture is a humanity destroyer. It is the dark heart of mankind that needs to be resisted at every step, because it destroys the humanity of torturer and tortured alike. In an odd sense, if you torture, you've also committed a crime against yourself, because you destroy your own humanity by diving into our ancient animal behavior. Torture most certainly has existed since the dawn of mankind, and it will continue, but civilization MUST DENY IT, or we cannot be civilization!
And, beyond all this, simply put, torture is illegal, period. And, the methods used, have long since been established as torture, and no parsing of the legality will change this. Waterboarding and sleep deprivation are torture. Many other techniques, like strappado, are as well.
What is eminently clear, is that the legal gymnastics they performed to justify brutality, over and over again, parsing this, and modifying that, were performed with fore knowledge of the illegality of all of the methods George W. Bush wanted used. He was obsessed with "kicking ass" and suffered no challenges to his position as Torturer-in-Chief. He quite literally went mad with what he perceived as the "unlimited power" of the Presidency, and had an able Yes Man in Dick Cheney, who worked tirelessly to remove all barriers to Bush doing as he pleased in anything he desired. And his greatest desire, even before 9/11, was to punish, and destroy, the "bad guys"...with Saddam firmly in his sights from virtually the moment he set foot in the White House.
The rhetoric of Bush and Cheney, and others, was quite striking to me, when they called for "destroying" the terrorists...not, stop them, or bring them to justice, only DESTROY the "evil doers". I had not heard this word used like this by any other American President in describing how to deal with threats from without. This is the hyperbole of small, cowardly men, thrust into positions of almost infinite power, who believe there can be no limits to their power, and thus, they act accordingly. And so it was that the torture regime was born. And so it is that we all bear some responsibility, however small, for allowing this torture circus to continue, and, for not demanding they be brought to justice NOW.
JUSTICE NOW!!!! BRING THE TORTURING WAR CRIMINALS TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR BESTIAL CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. START WITH BUSH, BECAUSE HE IS THE AUTHOR OF ALL OF THIS...AND THEN WORK DOWN FROM THERE. CHENEY, RICE, POWELL, ASHCROFT, GONZALES, HADLEY, ADDINGTON, BYBEE...THE LIST GOES ON AND ON...AND ALL MUST BE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE, OR THIS COUNTRY IS LOST. WE THE PEOPLE MUST DEMAND JUSTICE!!!! WE THE PEOPLE, MUST PREVAIL AND RESTORE AND RETURN LAW TO THIS COUNTRY.
'The rhetoric of Bush and Cheney, and others, was quite striking to me, when they called for "destroying" the terrorists...not, stop them, or bring them to justice, only DESTROY the "evil doers". ....This is the hyperbole of small, cowardly men, thrust into positions of almost infinite power, who believe there can be no limits to their power, and thus, they act accordingly.'
i think you stated that very well.
these maniacs you describe, technically out of power, are prancing around in the national media (cheney) admitting the use and efficacy of torture, as the current regime is pondering how to address this potential quagmire (politically - not morally). meanwhile the teabag parties continue.
the pronouncements and pride of the now liberated neo-cons (not in power, say what you want) is beyond pale. it's pathological. these characters have no sense of humility. i look forward to the day john ashcroft can sing 'free as an eagle' to himself in his small cell in the pen, i relish the day george bush the 2nd will be sitting alone on his bunk, staring at the concrete wall stammering - 'i just wanted america to love me, dad said it was ok'.
your correct, torture is always unacceptable and these clowns (the policy makers, administrators and torturers) need to go to jail. the complacent congresspeople should be outed - there fates left to the voters.
thanks for your post..
...peace...
I like to think of the "tea bag" protesters as douche bags.
And as to the fate of George W. Bush, I would quite seriously say that he should be prosecuted, and if found guilty, sentenced to death. His crimes are death penalty crimes for anyone else. The War Crimes Act of 1996 states clearly that if one tortures, and death results, the death penalty is the punishment...it does not include a caveat that if you were a "really good guy who was just trying to protect America", you get a pass on the law.
I am not an advocate of the death penalty, but considering Bush's lust driven embrace of the death penalty, in record numbers in Texas, I'd have to say I'd make an exception in his case, and Cheney's. If it truly were up to me, and I made the laws, it wouldn't happen, but I don't, and the laws are explicit...he has certainly had people tortured to death...and that is a death penalty crime, aka capital crime. You do the crime, you do the time...or pay in whatever way is proscribed by the law.
Pure sophistry. What are you, a law clerk for John Yoo or the infamous Bybee? What might your parsed definitions of torture be, both noun and verb? I seriously doubt you can offer any more to the tortured debate on torture that Yoo, Bybee et al. haven't already exhaustively labored over to "justify" the behavior you find so morally complex that only advanced sensibilities like yours can rightly appreciate. But I guess it will keep you from ever looking into the mirror Naomi Wolf prescribes for legal sophists like yourself. Just continue putting "torture" in quotes and sniffing at those who find it reprehensible and criminal. Yoo will give you an A.
Thanks for the comment, Ephraim. Here are some modified remarks I've made before.
"Torture" the noun and "torture" the verb are radically different. Any very unpleasant experience, such as pain, fear, disappointment, loss of function, or lack of sleep, may be torture. Billions of people experience torture as a result of disease or accident without there being a torturer. I don't think there's much to argue about concerning severity or duration. Most of us know what torture is.
"Torture" the verb has several elements. For a person P to be a torturer, P must inflict pain that can be described as torture (the noun) upon the one who experiences torture (V), but P's act cannot be what the criminal law describes as self defense or defense of another, or a battlefield action against a perceived enemy. This is because V must be in custody or otherwise disabled from attacking P or others before the act can be described as torture. P must realize that he's causing the pain, and P must be willing to cause the pain despite this awareness. Also, P must lack, objectively, sufficient justification for inflicting the pain.
It's this notion of justification that defies easy analysis. I think there could be justification if P knows the infliction of the pain (including possibly torture (noun)) will result in obtaining information or causing behavior that will allow preventing great and intolerable harm to others. To be justified, the pain P inflicts must be in proportion to the threat being addressed and its immediacy. Without justification, P's only possible motive for inflicting the pain is enjoyment in doing so, which everyone agrees is immoral and should be illegal.
A sharp distinction must be drawn between interrogations intended to result in criminal prosecution or punishment for crime and interrogations intended to prevent imminent loss of life and property. Most nations, including the U.S., have a black-letter prohibition against the former. I believe it's yet unclear whether a similar ban applies to the second type of interrogation.
Applying these considerations to various techniques such as waterboarding, whether they should be prohibited depends on whether the circumstances give rise to justification. A terrorist captured after a terrorist attack shouldn't be waterboarded unless there's a threat of another attack and information from the terrorist would help to counteract the threat. On the other hand, even if no attack had occurred, if interrogators had a reasonable belief that a terrorist plot was underway and infliction of pain on someone would lead to information that could allow defeating the plot, there would be a justification for the infliction of severe pain on the person having the information.
I've heard nothing to suggest that interrogations of terror suspects using such techniques as waterboarding were actually justified under the standard stated above. Evidently Mr. Cheney disagrees, but he hasn't proven his case, as far as I know.
We've suffered a terrible loss in the propaganda war because of unilateral Bush administration policies, including the abrogating of what people considered a blanket prohibition of any custodial torture. But the damage could be meliorated if the U.S. joined other nations, including those with large Muslim populations, in adopting legal standards with regard to custodial interrogations or treatment featuring the methods commonly described as torture (verb), including a sophisticated legal analysis and enforcement mechanism dealing with justification of such methods.
Pending deployment of international protocols, the U.S. should unilaterally ban all techniques described popularly as torture, regardless of justification. The war on terror won't be appreciably hindered by this for a couple of reasons. First, experience shows that torture seldom results in useful information or anything else of value. Second, if interrogators anywhere thought they had a reasonable chance of preventing great loss of life if they used one or more of the techniques universally identified as torture, they would proceed to use them despite laws against them. Most people would consider it such a great honor to thwart a deadly terrorist operation that they would gladly risk prosecution for violation of interrogation rules prohibiting torture.
Did you just take a philosophy 101 class? Your arguments, while interesting in an introductory class or text in philosophy, have little bearing in the real world.
"On the other hand, even if no attack had occurred, if interrogators had a reasonable belief that a terrorist plot was underway and infliction of pain on someone would lead to information that could allow defeating the plot, there would be a justification for the infliction of severe pain on the person having the information."
Who gets to define what is a "reasonable" belief? The torturers, no doubt. The problem with this argument is that you can only judge whether your belief is "reasonable", and whether the torturing lead to useful useable information, is if you have perfect knowledge, if you can see into the future. Or, if you can somehow travel back into the past, and undo your torture, if the information was not useful
"It's this notion of justification that defies easy analysis. I think there could be justification if P knows the infliction of the pain (including possibly torture (noun)) will result in obtaining information or causing behavior that will allow preventing great and intolerable harm to others."
Yes, this works well. In an introductory text / class to philosophy. Or in a perfect world with perfect knowledge. In the real, very imperfect world we live in, where humans do all kinds of things, including torture, based on all kinds of motives, you have no way to know whether you can actually obtain information that will allow the prevention of great harm.
" Any very unpleasant experience, such as pain, fear, disappointment, loss of function, or lack of sleep, may be torture.Billions of people experience torture as a result of disease or accident without there being a torturer."
This is nothing but pure sophistry. Someone suffering from cancer doest not consider himself to be undergoing torture, except maybe as a figure of speech. If I did not get enough sleep, because I spent most of the night reading a book I could not put down, I do not consider myself as having been tortured.
Most of the rest of the world is capable of separating the specific meaning of the word torture, used in an article like this, and other more figurative uses.
More legalistic sophistry (you really need to try to restrain your hyperacademic urges), but at least you come down fairly firmly on the side of sanity, even if it means attending upon "deployment of international protocols." Still, you should try to recognize a bit more of the human aspect of this issue with less emphasis on the stilted legalisms. No one undergoing torture Cheneystyle can be found interrupting his waterboarding session with questions of whether the "interrogation" should be described as more of the noun than verb species.
"... a sophisticated legal analysis and enforcement mechanism dealing with justification of such methods."
John Yoo and Jay Bybee have a lot of experience with such sophisticated legal analysis and justification of torture. If you want to see where that leads, go ask the Guantanamo prisoners who are beating their heads against the wall in a desperate attempt to end their misery.
"Most people would consider it such a great honor to thwart a deadly terrorist operation that they would gladly risk prosecution for violation of interrogation rules prohibiting torture."
Do you really think the soldiers who were photographed smiling over piles of naked prisoners were motivated by a sense of honor?
I'm familiar, though not intimately, with the ideas of Yoo and Bybee. As I understand them, they thought one could inflict a certain amount of discomfort or even pain and not be guilty of violating anti-torture conventions, as long as one didn't cross a certain threshold, such as severing a limb, destroying organs, etc. These ideas have nothing to do with mine. As I understand them, Yoo and Bybee were about justifying what was clearly illegal and morally unconscionable. Nothing was said concerning the high standards I propose regarding justification based on a high degree of certainty of protection of society. Nothing was said concerning the necessity for international agreements before severe pain could be justifiably inflicted by the U.S.
By the way, I've never heard anyone distinguish torture the noun and torture the verb. And I should point out that torture the verb is inherently wrong, which is why I decline to say that torture (the verb) is sometimes justified. The same acts will constitute torture or not depending on whether they're justified.
On the battlefield, infliction of the worst sort of pain, even against civilian non-combatants, isn't just tolerated or rationalized, it's honored. Some of the most egregious examples I know of were inscribed in the ashes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the ruins German cities. It's at least arguable that those horrible steps were necessary. Millions of Americans seem content with them, and evidently millions of Japanese and Germans have forgiven the U.S. for them. I don't think it's totally outrageous to suggest that in very rare instances – which I don't believe have been shown to have occurred even in the wake of 9/11 – the infliction of pain on a few individuals might be justified. And anyone willing to lay down his life in defense of his country won't be deterred by a criminal law from doing what's he firmly believes to be reasonably necessary to defend his country.
The Abu Graib atrocities support my position. I would make it a requirement that only someone who is repulsed and sickened by anything approaching torture should be considered a candidate to inflict severe pain in those rare situations (which I emphasize don't seem to have yet occurred) wherein it would be justified.
I admire those who find harming humans, and even animals, repulsive. Nevertheless, in defense of our population and our cities, harm to others is sometimes justified. Because torture (the verb) is by definition never justified, it's just a truism to say all torture must be outlawed. The categorical assertion that such devices as waterboarding, sleep deprivation, etc., can never be justified isn't true.
Yep. Your last paragraph pretty much confirmed my initial impression of your arguments:
"Oh noes, won't someone please think of the children, whom torture is protecting from a complex and dangerous world". Trying to justify torture by spreading fear, uncertainty and despair.
Your entire argument applies only to a hypothetical ticking-bomb scenario that has no relation to the real world.
You have presumably read the stories of sadism and brutality inflicted upon men, women, and children, most of whom had not even been accused of any crime, let alone tried and convicted, and many of whom we know to be innocent. The fact that you choose this moment to engage in intellectual gymnastics in an attempt to distill a legal and moral justification of torture in certain circumstances shows just how out of whack your own moral compass is.
"Because torture (the verb) is by definition never justified, it's just a truism to say all torture must be outlawed. The categorical assertion that such devices as waterboarding, sleep deprivation, etc., can never be justified isn't true."
Here you reveal a sociopathic inability to even think morally. You separate torture (the verb) from torture (the noun) to allow waterboarding, etc. so long as it's done in the noun form. Can torture exist as a "noun" if it is never undertaken? If it is undertaken, it is so only as a VERB. Waterboarding, sleep deprivation, hanging from ceilings, subjection to stinging, biting insects (see Bybee's brief) only occur as actions, hence as verbs. You walk calmly and resolutely in absurd contradictions. Must be the afterglow of your lunatic logic.
Ephraim, you didn't get my meaning. Torture the noun is what the tortured person experiences, which can be caused by any number of things, including a human torturer. Torture the verb is inflicting the torture experienced by the torture victim. As far as I know, only humans are capable of inflicting pain purely for the enjoyment of inflicting it. That, I contend, is the purest form of torture (verb), and is universally considered morally abhorrent, and must be forbidden by law.
Humans are capable of inflicting pain for a higher purpose than the enjoyment of witnessing someone suffer, and the fact that people experience torture (noun) as a result, e.g. in war, must not blind us to the possibility that the infliction of pain was justified. I personally believe that defense of ourselves or of others we have a relationship with (family, friends, countrymen, innocent people everywhere) is the only justification for causing others to suffer great pain. This is loosely described as self-defense, although obviously it includes defense of third persons.
As I've stated several times in this discussion, I've yet to hear from the Bush administration anything qualifying as justification for the actions taken that Mr. Cheney approves of. There was an actual incident in Germany in 2002 in which police interrogators threatened to inflict severe pain on a suspected child kidnapper unless he revealed the location of the child. Check the story out at http://books.google.com/books?id=RSvAKgxEhuwC&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq=germany+kidnapper+torture+police&s... . The interrogators thought the prisoner had to be threatened in the interest of saving the child's life, notwithstanding a German law prohibiting torture. Information was elicited, but the child was already dead. The police argued that it would have been immoral not to threaten the prisoner. The court disallowed evidence elicited by the threat, but not evidence otherwise collected. The kidnapper got life in prison. The responsible police official received only a warning and a fine. The article discusses the apparent exception in German that allows torture to be used, or deems it justified, in some cases. (My semantic quarrel with this is that the threat wasn't a threat to torture (verb), but to inflict severe pain that, absent justification, would make the act one of torture. I recognize that this distinction is difficult and probably meaningless to many people. But it makes a lot more sense to me than the distinctions asserted by Yoo and Bybee.)
I see no difference, in principle, between this case and the hypothetical cases asserted by Dick Cheney. The reason what Bush did was so wrong, not only to the prisoners, but to the American people, is that it was done in a manner that handed the enemies of freedom just the tool they needed to recruit terrorists. If the U.S. had stood by international laws against torture, and made sure that any exceptions like the one discussed in Germany were internationally recognized, especially by Muslim-dominated countries, we could have avoided the huge loss we've suffered in the propaganda war.
Ah yes, the old and tired and morally empty "oh noes, won't someone please think of the children" whom torture is protecting from a dangerous and complex world argument.
No, the most important point here is that people like you are trying to justify torture by using fear, uncertainty and despair.
Bunk!
You are rationalizing completely unacceptable behavior.
NO circumstances justify torture.
Just the title of your Article wouldn't get much argument from me. Even so I've met people of all races who regardless of how things are in your Nation are trying to do their best within the framework of what you call Civilization.
Myself, I am just on my journey through your world. Met so many people in my travels & have such wonderful memories of the time I spent with them. I am happy to be a part of Creator's creation. To see Creator's earth. To get out in nature & be among Creator's critters, & all the other life forms of creation.
To be this thing called, alive, & to hear the song of the birds. To walk through a woods or forest that to me is a living breathing painting that I am being treated, too. To watch the sunrises & sunsets that are living breathing paintings I am being treated,too.
They may be the same in many regards, and yet the painting always changes in many regards, textures, shapes, & colors.
Quite rain today, but the birds still sing.
The planet orbits going nowhere & getting nowhere.
Life is good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive.
Sioux Rose
SHADOW: Thank you for the reminder(s) of the profound and oft'times impossible beauty around us all. Your post reminds me of something Don Juan said to Carlos Casteneda when he suffered from one of his blues moods: "Seek and see the marvels around you, and you will get tired of dwelling upon yourself so much." I live within proximity to MANY critters and bird songs, too... and am DEEPLY grateful for these gifts, vanishing as "development" spreads like an angry virus across the living earth.
As a Canadian how do you profess to speak in behalf of Americans? It is clear to me that you speak for yourself Naomi. Most Americans do NOT wear uniforms of the state.
These crimes were just that,--crimes! They need to all be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Without that we will get sons and daughters of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, Rice, Powell who will screw things up 30 years from now all over again just like they did from the days of Nexon. These people are cancer-ridden and need radical mastectomy-like operations on their pointy little heads.
michael jordan
http://sites.google.com/site/apolloguide/
Naomi Wolf - not to be confused with Naomi Klein.
It is Klein who is Canadian.
Thanks for pointing this out.
michael jordan
http://sites.google.com/site/apolloguide/
I think that a huge complication with appropriate investigations going forward is that it would require the wrongdoing regime investigating and punishing itself for foundational crimes. Pelosi and most of Congress's prior approval of the torture is a symptom of this.
Comparisons are often made to Nuremberg. At Nuremberg, however, it was an outside force or collection of forces - the entities, other nations, which defeated the Axis in WW2 - that conducted the investigations and carried through the sentences.
In the present case of the US torture and war crimes, on the other hand, it would actually require the same regime in power to investigate itself. We have a new administration, but the same regime, with generally the same class of ruling elites and much of the same ideology handed down in a continuation of power, at every national election in the US.
Has there EVER been an instance in history of a ruling class admitting to its own major crimes, and prosecuting itself? Anywhere?
Perhaps the US system of peaceful transfer of nominal power via elections has some major down sides, such as the present dilemma. Is revolution the only real answer?
Sioux Rose
Gee, YOHO, we are in complete alignment as per the valid and significant observations you just raised. Bravo.
I am in favor of Senator Patrick Leahy proceeding with an investigation and truth seeking panel regarding the torture policy of the Bush administration. He should know he has the support of those of us who have always been against torture.
I disagree, as well, with Wolf's asserting that I am responsible for the torture policy. This rhetorical devise adds drama to a piece but it is not an accurate conclusion to have come to.
It is more fun to spend two years investigating and impeaching one President for a sexual fling in the White House and not being truthful (under oath). Isn`t it about time to do the same investigating for lying us into war, killing thousands, throwing our surplus away, torturing, breaking many treaties, trampling on the Constitution, and doing that also under oath instead of in a private meeting with no notes taken and no reporters allowed? Our country seems to have lost it`s principles and anything goes as long as I get mine.
The lewinsky affair was good theatre... Like "Wag the Dog", it was a spectacle designed to distract everyone from the "war of choice" in the former Yugoslavia and the escalation of class war here at home...
Just like OJ Simpson & baby Jessica & michael Jackson in the 90's... It is a scandal that gets played over & over & over & over until everyone is sick of the news and stops paying attention to politics... Clinton knew it was all theatre... It gave him cover to sign NAFTA, sign welfare reform, add 100k cops to the streets, expand the "war on drugs", and continue the embargo and weekly bombing raids on Iraq that killed over a million Iraqi's, and launched Plan Colombia...
Coupled with Fitzgerald's "investigation" into the Plame outing, It made Americans weary of any future special prosecutions, since it would be a just another show trial that might find some lower level leutenant guilty, who will be pardoned or sentence commuted anyway...
"indemnify those lower down the chain of command to get their testimonies,"
That is, make their suspended sentences CONDITIONAL on their testimony. It is absurd to suppose that people carrying out those acts thought they were OK. Either they are sadists who shouldn't be running loose, or they aren't sleeping at night. I wonder how many have severe PTSD? The good ones.
Testimony would help a lot with that; their "indemnification" should be completely conditional.
But this isn't the real issue: the real issue is "moving forward," which means that Obama gets to keep Bush's usurped powers.
I campaigned against him and for Cynthia McKinney, but even I didn't think he was this bad.
Oregoncharles
For reasons that pass understanding, Americans still believe they have a basically good country, honest, true to it's word. They still seek answers to their problems as well as the internal problems of the US and Foreign calamities in the confines of the same failed, moribund system. It is clear that most Americans have no earthly awareness of the REAL underbelly of this rotting corpse of a nation. It has only had to fight ONE war since the Revolutionary war. That would be world war II. Partly because of the draconian laws applied to Germany, and because Wall STreet was supplying Hitler with steel, money, and other war making commodities. America is no democracy,never has been,and moves further from that goal with each passing day. This country is in desperate need of an ENTIRE SOCIAL CONTROL PARADIGM SHIFT. That would be the dissolution of the current clearly proven worthless "government" currently extant. Either we look for peace, or we don't. I've heard the continuous ongoing canard that we want peace but we have to protect ourselves from the other mopes in the world. First the US would have set peace as their motive for EVERYTHING THEY DO. NOT MONEY, POWER, AND GREED. The US cannot beat China in "Free Market Capitalism." The US plays by no real rules, and anyone who believes in "market forces" as those that restore it to honesty and smooth running is clearly stupid. Sorry Naomi, i'm no terrorist. I've been twice visited by the US Secret Service for threatening George Bush. In truth, i'm a poor man, and there is nothing i could really do, but there are other people who could take on a leadership position that aren't limpwristed, pantie sniffers. So far though, nobody has stepped up to the plate. Since next time i go to jail, i'll avoid Bush. Even Obama is stumped. But I expected this. There is no way he could know what he was getting himself into. My best of hopes for the President. I think I could believe him if he came up with things i can do that don't involve talking to the American sheeple
tedbohne
N321MM@msn.com
"There is no way [Obama] could know what he was getting himself into."
I'm interested in knowing what makes you believe that.
During World War II there were many in Germany who were against the policies of the Nazi regime. But after the war, all of the German people were held responsible.
Yes, we have opposed the torture from the start. But the fact that we have not stopped it and held those accountable who formunlated and carried it out makes us complicit today. We (and that includes me) have not done enough. What will we tell future generations when they ask "Why did you not hold those responsible for their crimes? Why did you allow it to continue?"
Yes I have written to Congress. But that does not absolve me of the blame until everyone responsible for these attrocities is brought to justice.
I hang my head in shame.
Tell me how opposed you were.
The US was founded on genocide of MY people and on slavery.
What else do you need to show what great guys you are?
Without a doubt, all of those charges are valid. If the world is to be constantly reminded of an ongoing holocaust and of a long suffering people then it surely should be the indigenous populations of the western hemisphere. Read, "A Little Matter of Genocide" by Ward Churchill, copyright 1997.
In the U.s. no race of people has been treated as harshly as the indigenous people and something must be done about their ongoing plight. It is superfluous for any group in the U.s. to advocate for the succor of other peoples in foreign lands when one of the world's great crimes is ongoing within the very borders of the U.s. and it is ignored.
and on gun running.
The American government has always maintained the right of its citizens to ship arms to belligerents. President Washington took this position when France protested against the sale of arms to England in 1793, the answer being that "the exporting from the United States of warlike instruments and military stores is not to be interfered with." - Theodore Roosevelt's "Fear God..."p.160
Sioux Rose
Who the hell has to answer to you, MRaven, Serena, and now Patt Garrett, you grotesque pompous self-righteous arrogant fraud! Get your ass over here and lead the parade for social justice, since you're so fast to condemn EVERY ONE in this forum. And by all means secure that breathing mask or the foul breath (in the form of your words and constant castigation against others) may return to you.
Hate speech from the New Age sweetpea in whose mouth butter would not melt?! (Nice projection of your un-integrated shadow, though.)
My ass is not available to be given orders, sorry. And I would not lead you hypocritical gringos anywhere--not even down the primrose path.
You're leading yourselves right over the edge into the abyss.
Good riddance.
Sioux Rose
You are quite right, I detest you and other blood suckers. New age (which by the way is a crock regarding MY beliefs. Astrology is as old as the human count of time!) or otherwise, I have human emotions; and the way you slither into the forum like a snake looking for someone to put your fangs into deserves to be called for what it is. You think you're removed from the abyss? Like you are free of flaws and can judge the rest of us? You remind me of someone run out of town who has to forge the next identity to get served at the local tavern. And frankly, I felt like calling you on it today. Sometimes polite doesn't work for me.