thebullet
Rebel without applause
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2003
- Posts
- 1,247
Is this American?
By Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
Thursday 02 December 2004
Austin - It is both peculiar and chilling to find
oneself discussing the problem of American torture. I
have considered support of basic human rights and
dignity so much a part of our national identity that
this feels as strange as though I'd suddenly become
Chinese or found Fidel Castro in the refrigerator.
One's first response to the report by the
International Red Cross about torture at our prison at Guantánamo is denial. "I don't want to think about it; I don't want to hear about it; we're the good guys, they're the bad guys; shut up. And besides, they attacked us first."
But our country has opposed torture since its
founding. One of our founding principles is that cruel
and unusual punishment is both illegal and wrong.
Every year, our State Department issues a report
grading other countries on their support for or
violations of human rights.
The first requirement here is that we look at what
we are doing - and not blink, not use euphemisms.
Despite the Red Cross' polite language, this is not
"tantamount to torture." It's torture. It is not
"detainee abuse." It's torture. If they were doing it
to you, you would know it was torture. It must be
hidden away, because it's happening in Cuba or
elsewhere abroad.
Yes, it's true, we did sort of know this already.
It was clear when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke in Iraq
that the infection had come from Guantánamo. The
infamous memos by Alberto Gonzales, our next attorney
general, and by John Ashcroft's "Justice" Department
pretty well laid it out.
In a way, Abu Ghraib, as bizarrely sadistic as it
was, is easier to understand than this cold,
relentless and apparently endless procedure at Gitmo.
At least Abu Ghraib took place in the context of war.
At Guantánamo, there is no threat to anyone -
Americans are not being killed or hurt there.
The Red Cross report says, "The construction of
such a system, whose stated purpose is the production
of intelligence, cannot be considered other than an
intentional system of cruel, unusual and degrading
treatment, and a form of torture."
Our country, the one you and I are responsible
for, has imprisoned these "illegal combatants" for
three years now. What the hell else do we expect to
get out of them? We don't even release their names or
say what they're charged with - whether they're
Taliban, Al Qaeda or just some farmers who happened to
get in the way (in Afghanistan, farmers and soldiers
are apt to be the same).
If this hasn't been established in three years,
when will it be? How long are they to be subjected to "humiliating acts, solitary confinement, temperature extremes, use of forced positions"?
In the name of Jesus Christ Almighty, why are
people representing our government, paid by us,
writing filth on the Korans of helpless prisoners? Is
this American? Is it Christian? What are our moral
values? Where are the clergymen on this? Speak out,
speak up.
The creepiest aspect of the Red Cross report is
the involvement of doctors and psychiatrists in
something called "Biscuit" teams. Get used to that
acronym: It stands for Behavioral Science Consultation
Team and will end up in the same category of national
shame as Wounded Knee. According to The New York
Times, Biscuit teams are "composed of psychologists
and psychological workers who advise the
interrogators." Shades of Dr. Mengele.
An earlier Red Cross report questioned whether "psychological torture" was taking place. I guess that's what you call sleep deprivation and prolonged exposure to extremely loud noises while shackled to a chair. The beatings reported would not be psychological torture. I pass over the apparently abandoned practice of sexual taunting. The Red Cross also reports a far greater incidence of mental illness caused by stress.
If you have neither the imagination nor the
empathy to envision yourself in such circumstances,
please consider why the senior commanders in the
military are so horrified by this. It's very simple.
Because, if we do this, if we break international law
and the conventions of warfare, then the same thing
can be done to American soldiers who are captured
abroad. Any country can use exactly the same lame
rationale about "enemy combatants" to torture American
troops in any kind of conflict. Then we would protest
to the Red Cross, of course.
I suppose one could argue that we're fighting
people who chop off the heads of their prisoners, so
there. Since when have we taken up Abu al-Zarqawi as a
role model? In the famous hypothetical example, you
might consider torture justified if you had a
terrorist who knew where a bomb was planted that was
about to go off. But three years later? Some people
have got to be held accountable for this, and that
would include Congress.
My question is: What are you going to do about
this? It's your country, your money, your government.
You own it, you run it, you are the board of
directors. They are doing this in your name. The
people we elect to public office do what you want them
to. Perhaps you should get in touch with them.
By Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
Thursday 02 December 2004
Austin - It is both peculiar and chilling to find
oneself discussing the problem of American torture. I
have considered support of basic human rights and
dignity so much a part of our national identity that
this feels as strange as though I'd suddenly become
Chinese or found Fidel Castro in the refrigerator.
One's first response to the report by the
International Red Cross about torture at our prison at Guantánamo is denial. "I don't want to think about it; I don't want to hear about it; we're the good guys, they're the bad guys; shut up. And besides, they attacked us first."
But our country has opposed torture since its
founding. One of our founding principles is that cruel
and unusual punishment is both illegal and wrong.
Every year, our State Department issues a report
grading other countries on their support for or
violations of human rights.
The first requirement here is that we look at what
we are doing - and not blink, not use euphemisms.
Despite the Red Cross' polite language, this is not
"tantamount to torture." It's torture. It is not
"detainee abuse." It's torture. If they were doing it
to you, you would know it was torture. It must be
hidden away, because it's happening in Cuba or
elsewhere abroad.
Yes, it's true, we did sort of know this already.
It was clear when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke in Iraq
that the infection had come from Guantánamo. The
infamous memos by Alberto Gonzales, our next attorney
general, and by John Ashcroft's "Justice" Department
pretty well laid it out.
In a way, Abu Ghraib, as bizarrely sadistic as it
was, is easier to understand than this cold,
relentless and apparently endless procedure at Gitmo.
At least Abu Ghraib took place in the context of war.
At Guantánamo, there is no threat to anyone -
Americans are not being killed or hurt there.
The Red Cross report says, "The construction of
such a system, whose stated purpose is the production
of intelligence, cannot be considered other than an
intentional system of cruel, unusual and degrading
treatment, and a form of torture."
Our country, the one you and I are responsible
for, has imprisoned these "illegal combatants" for
three years now. What the hell else do we expect to
get out of them? We don't even release their names or
say what they're charged with - whether they're
Taliban, Al Qaeda or just some farmers who happened to
get in the way (in Afghanistan, farmers and soldiers
are apt to be the same).
If this hasn't been established in three years,
when will it be? How long are they to be subjected to "humiliating acts, solitary confinement, temperature extremes, use of forced positions"?
In the name of Jesus Christ Almighty, why are
people representing our government, paid by us,
writing filth on the Korans of helpless prisoners? Is
this American? Is it Christian? What are our moral
values? Where are the clergymen on this? Speak out,
speak up.
The creepiest aspect of the Red Cross report is
the involvement of doctors and psychiatrists in
something called "Biscuit" teams. Get used to that
acronym: It stands for Behavioral Science Consultation
Team and will end up in the same category of national
shame as Wounded Knee. According to The New York
Times, Biscuit teams are "composed of psychologists
and psychological workers who advise the
interrogators." Shades of Dr. Mengele.
An earlier Red Cross report questioned whether "psychological torture" was taking place. I guess that's what you call sleep deprivation and prolonged exposure to extremely loud noises while shackled to a chair. The beatings reported would not be psychological torture. I pass over the apparently abandoned practice of sexual taunting. The Red Cross also reports a far greater incidence of mental illness caused by stress.
If you have neither the imagination nor the
empathy to envision yourself in such circumstances,
please consider why the senior commanders in the
military are so horrified by this. It's very simple.
Because, if we do this, if we break international law
and the conventions of warfare, then the same thing
can be done to American soldiers who are captured
abroad. Any country can use exactly the same lame
rationale about "enemy combatants" to torture American
troops in any kind of conflict. Then we would protest
to the Red Cross, of course.
I suppose one could argue that we're fighting
people who chop off the heads of their prisoners, so
there. Since when have we taken up Abu al-Zarqawi as a
role model? In the famous hypothetical example, you
might consider torture justified if you had a
terrorist who knew where a bomb was planted that was
about to go off. But three years later? Some people
have got to be held accountable for this, and that
would include Congress.
My question is: What are you going to do about
this? It's your country, your money, your government.
You own it, you run it, you are the board of
directors. They are doing this in your name. The
people we elect to public office do what you want them
to. Perhaps you should get in touch with them.
