SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
When We Allow Fear to Overcome Reason
Sep 10, 2009
On Christmas morning in 1776, upon crossing the Delaware River and securing victory in the Battle of Trenton, George Washington sat astride his horse and issued instructions to his lieutenants. "Treat surrendering prisoners with humanity,'' he told them. "Let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British army.''
It is ironic that these words uttered by an American general would lay the ground rules for the humane treatment of prisoners worldwide.
Washington knew from the cold reality of a vicious war that the moral high ground is not won by access to depravity and revenge against those in captivity, but in the knowledge that retaining the moral high ground would ultimately result in victory and, as such, inspire mankind. Washington stood among the carnage in the darkest hours on the cusp of a nation's freedom and willed his reason to overcome his fear.
On Sept. 11, 2001, after being informed that the nation was under attack, President George W. Bush pursed his lips, overwhelmed by the information he had just received. Unlike George Washington, it would appear fear carried the day. For in the days, months, and years following that infamous morning, the president and his administration would undo every hard-won value and principle bestowed on the nation by the first president and the founding fathers.
The Bush administration would extinguish the beacon lit by these great statesmen. It would be responsible (though make every attempt to circumvent the law) for willful acts of ill treatment and torture. That ill treatment would find its way from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib, where individuals bereft of any legal safeguards would languish in limbo beyond the reach of any international laws in direct contrast to the nation's core beliefs.
Terrorism robbed this nation of its power of reason overtaken by fear - just as it did the British government in 1974 when I became the first person arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act - an emergency provisions bill passed by the British Parliament in response to a series of obscene IRA bombings on Britain. For seven days, I was held incommunicado, sleep deprived, food deprived, and interrogated for periods of up to 20 hours a day. I was brutally abused by police officers. My family was threatened with death. I was threatened with firearms, mock-execution style, an action that under today's US Army Field Manual constitutes torture.
I was charged with seven counts of murder and was sentenced in October 1975 to life in prison, with the judge stipulating that "life must mean life,'' and that his only regret was that the death penalty - which had just been abolished - was not an option. I remained in prison for 15 years until 1989, when I was taken, with my three co-accused, to the Old Bailey in London and told we were being let go.
Lord Lane, who presided over our release, informed us that the Surrey police officers and Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist police seriously misled the court, "in fact they must have lied in their doctoring and manufacturing of evidence,'' he told us.
In the following 18 months, more than 16 Irish citizens would be released as a result of the actions of the police acting on the orders of the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1974. These people had spent periods between eight and 17 years in prison. All have since received direct apologies from the British government.
These examples of British actions in response to terrorism appear to have been ignored by the American administration. Torture reveals nothing. In the words of the former secretary of the Navy James Webb, "Tainted evidence comes from torture. Many people will tell their interrogators what they want to hear, accurate or not.''
I was that person. We told our interrogators exactly what they wanted to hear, "accurate or not,'' in order to stop our suffering.
As we remember those who died in the 9/11 attacks, it should be a fitting memorial to them that we refuse to let their deaths be used politically as an excuse for torture.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Boston Globe
On Christmas morning in 1776, upon crossing the Delaware River and securing victory in the Battle of Trenton, George Washington sat astride his horse and issued instructions to his lieutenants. "Treat surrendering prisoners with humanity,'' he told them. "Let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British army.''
It is ironic that these words uttered by an American general would lay the ground rules for the humane treatment of prisoners worldwide.
Washington knew from the cold reality of a vicious war that the moral high ground is not won by access to depravity and revenge against those in captivity, but in the knowledge that retaining the moral high ground would ultimately result in victory and, as such, inspire mankind. Washington stood among the carnage in the darkest hours on the cusp of a nation's freedom and willed his reason to overcome his fear.
On Sept. 11, 2001, after being informed that the nation was under attack, President George W. Bush pursed his lips, overwhelmed by the information he had just received. Unlike George Washington, it would appear fear carried the day. For in the days, months, and years following that infamous morning, the president and his administration would undo every hard-won value and principle bestowed on the nation by the first president and the founding fathers.
The Bush administration would extinguish the beacon lit by these great statesmen. It would be responsible (though make every attempt to circumvent the law) for willful acts of ill treatment and torture. That ill treatment would find its way from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib, where individuals bereft of any legal safeguards would languish in limbo beyond the reach of any international laws in direct contrast to the nation's core beliefs.
Terrorism robbed this nation of its power of reason overtaken by fear - just as it did the British government in 1974 when I became the first person arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act - an emergency provisions bill passed by the British Parliament in response to a series of obscene IRA bombings on Britain. For seven days, I was held incommunicado, sleep deprived, food deprived, and interrogated for periods of up to 20 hours a day. I was brutally abused by police officers. My family was threatened with death. I was threatened with firearms, mock-execution style, an action that under today's US Army Field Manual constitutes torture.
I was charged with seven counts of murder and was sentenced in October 1975 to life in prison, with the judge stipulating that "life must mean life,'' and that his only regret was that the death penalty - which had just been abolished - was not an option. I remained in prison for 15 years until 1989, when I was taken, with my three co-accused, to the Old Bailey in London and told we were being let go.
Lord Lane, who presided over our release, informed us that the Surrey police officers and Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist police seriously misled the court, "in fact they must have lied in their doctoring and manufacturing of evidence,'' he told us.
In the following 18 months, more than 16 Irish citizens would be released as a result of the actions of the police acting on the orders of the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1974. These people had spent periods between eight and 17 years in prison. All have since received direct apologies from the British government.
These examples of British actions in response to terrorism appear to have been ignored by the American administration. Torture reveals nothing. In the words of the former secretary of the Navy James Webb, "Tainted evidence comes from torture. Many people will tell their interrogators what they want to hear, accurate or not.''
I was that person. We told our interrogators exactly what they wanted to hear, "accurate or not,'' in order to stop our suffering.
As we remember those who died in the 9/11 attacks, it should be a fitting memorial to them that we refuse to let their deaths be used politically as an excuse for torture.
On Christmas morning in 1776, upon crossing the Delaware River and securing victory in the Battle of Trenton, George Washington sat astride his horse and issued instructions to his lieutenants. "Treat surrendering prisoners with humanity,'' he told them. "Let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British army.''
It is ironic that these words uttered by an American general would lay the ground rules for the humane treatment of prisoners worldwide.
Washington knew from the cold reality of a vicious war that the moral high ground is not won by access to depravity and revenge against those in captivity, but in the knowledge that retaining the moral high ground would ultimately result in victory and, as such, inspire mankind. Washington stood among the carnage in the darkest hours on the cusp of a nation's freedom and willed his reason to overcome his fear.
On Sept. 11, 2001, after being informed that the nation was under attack, President George W. Bush pursed his lips, overwhelmed by the information he had just received. Unlike George Washington, it would appear fear carried the day. For in the days, months, and years following that infamous morning, the president and his administration would undo every hard-won value and principle bestowed on the nation by the first president and the founding fathers.
The Bush administration would extinguish the beacon lit by these great statesmen. It would be responsible (though make every attempt to circumvent the law) for willful acts of ill treatment and torture. That ill treatment would find its way from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib, where individuals bereft of any legal safeguards would languish in limbo beyond the reach of any international laws in direct contrast to the nation's core beliefs.
Terrorism robbed this nation of its power of reason overtaken by fear - just as it did the British government in 1974 when I became the first person arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act - an emergency provisions bill passed by the British Parliament in response to a series of obscene IRA bombings on Britain. For seven days, I was held incommunicado, sleep deprived, food deprived, and interrogated for periods of up to 20 hours a day. I was brutally abused by police officers. My family was threatened with death. I was threatened with firearms, mock-execution style, an action that under today's US Army Field Manual constitutes torture.
I was charged with seven counts of murder and was sentenced in October 1975 to life in prison, with the judge stipulating that "life must mean life,'' and that his only regret was that the death penalty - which had just been abolished - was not an option. I remained in prison for 15 years until 1989, when I was taken, with my three co-accused, to the Old Bailey in London and told we were being let go.
Lord Lane, who presided over our release, informed us that the Surrey police officers and Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist police seriously misled the court, "in fact they must have lied in their doctoring and manufacturing of evidence,'' he told us.
In the following 18 months, more than 16 Irish citizens would be released as a result of the actions of the police acting on the orders of the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1974. These people had spent periods between eight and 17 years in prison. All have since received direct apologies from the British government.
These examples of British actions in response to terrorism appear to have been ignored by the American administration. Torture reveals nothing. In the words of the former secretary of the Navy James Webb, "Tainted evidence comes from torture. Many people will tell their interrogators what they want to hear, accurate or not.''
I was that person. We told our interrogators exactly what they wanted to hear, "accurate or not,'' in order to stop our suffering.
As we remember those who died in the 9/11 attacks, it should be a fitting memorial to them that we refuse to let their deaths be used politically as an excuse for torture.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.