Osama bin Laden dies, torture thrives

[cali]

By WILLIAM YEOMANS | 5/5/11 5:24 PM EDT

The unity and pride inspired by the killing of Osama Bin Laden has quickly deteriorated into a nasty debate over the effectiveness of torture.

<snip>

While President George W. Bush took the nation down the dark path to torture, Obama ensured that it remained part of our national debate by failing to investigate and hold to account those who tortured.

His failure to do so means that we now debate publicly whether or not to torture based on assessments of whether or not torture is effective – a question relevant only if we accept that effective torture is justified. Torture, it seems, is no longer immoral or unlawful so long as it works.

The current debate offers occasion to consider the distance we have covered in legitimating torture. In 1984, President Ronald Reagan — no national security softy — signed the U.N. Convention Against Torture. In his signing statement, Reagan denounced torture as an “abhorrent” practice and emphasized the need for universal jurisdiction to prosecute individuals who engaged in torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading practices.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54409.html#ixzz1LWO6iB1Q

[derby378]

1. And what about Bradley Manning?

Reasonable suicide watch procedures or just flat out psychological torture? I think we know the score here.