How is it that we are debating "torture" yet again?

[PatSeg]

Or for that matter, how is it that we EVER were debating the use of torture? What scares me is sometimes I find myself getting used to the debate and then I slap myself awake. I see newscasters on television actually getting involved in these discussions, as if there may be a reasonable justification for torture under some extreme circumstance.

Until the Bush presidency, I had never heard a sane American talk about torture as anything other than what sadistic enemies did, often for no good reason other than to be cruel. I had never heard anyone say, "We don't torture EXCEPT, blah, blah, blah." Torture was shocking, horrifying, nightmarish, not a tool. If anyone should have even suggested the use of torture, they would have been shut down very quickly.

Has a large segment of our society become more sadistic or maybe just more insensitive? It is truly disturbing. I've seen so many changes in our society the past ten years, but this is the one that concerns me the most.

[MrMickeysMom]

1. I agree with the public at large and de sensitivity training...

Keep having this argument over and over again until mental fatigue leads to it.

"We don't torture".... Oh, we DON'T? (rinse, repeat)

It shocks me like the doctrine is supposed to and then I see DU posters join right in and drink from that Kool Aid pitcher. Just got through being disgusted with this recently with OBL's assassination.

"We don't assassinate".... Oh, we DON'T?

Makes me want to spit up.

[PatSeg]

2. Yeah, that's what it is

We are being desensitized and I hate it. Some things are shocking for good reason and I don't want to get used to it.

[napoleon_in_rags]

3. The statement has come from on high that torture did not lead to the UBL capture.

What is left is a bunch of people trying to explain how they institutionalized a DSM grade sexual pathology into a US policy, spent billions on it, got nothing, but it was all worthwhile.

[chill_wind]

4. Because we haven't denounced it for once and for all

in a meaningful way. Like.. I don't know-- somebody in the torture regime or part of its authorship, and the protecting and coverups actually going to prison. That would probably "clarify" matters a little.

[PatSeg]

8. That would certainly make a difference

When those involved found out that there were no consequences for their actions, they just became more outspoken publicly. I couldn't believe John Yoo had the nerve to show his face on TV again. They not only have no shame, they have no fear either. Damn, even Nixon had the decency to break a sweat when he resigned. These guys act like they are daring people to do something.

Oddly enough, the one who has kept a low profile is Bush. He may be the only one who realizes on some level how wrong they were. Or maybe not. Maybe he just doesn't want any confrontation.

[Deep13]

5. Torturing prisoners is a federal crime.

But it's not as bad as refusing to prosecute.

[leftstreet]

6. Oh it's just a little waterboarding! They even did it on Fox News

:sarcasm:

It's interesting that no one on Fox volunteered to be raped as an experiment

K&R

[azul]

7. Propaganda plain and simple

Remember "24" and the ticking atom bomb and the torture?

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Philippe Sands. His book is called The Torture Team. It’s coming out in a few weeks. His piece in Vanity Fair is called “The Green Light.” Can you talk about 24, the TV show?

PHILIPPE SANDS: I can. I can also reveal an embarrassment, which is that when I was interviewing Diane Beaver, she—and I wasn’t recording it; I was taking handwritten notes—I wrote down very quickly “24 Becker.” And then when I got back to my hotel room and typed up the notes, it didn’t ring any bells for me, so I typed it out, I typed it into Google, and it came up with “24—do you mean ‘24 Bauer’?” So I typed yes, I went and followed it, and of course that opened the door to something that came completely unexpectedly, that the individuals down at Guantanamo were watching and were being influenced by the film program—the TV program 24.

I went back. I spoke with others, including Diane Beaver again and Mike Dunlavey, and went into great detail. And it turns out, as she described it to me, the TV program 24 had many friends down at Guantanamo. And the timing is fascinating. The abusive interrogations started in November 2002, just three weeks after the start of the second series of 24. And it seems that there was a direct connection between that program and the creating of an environment in which individuals felt it was permissible to push the envelope, as it was put to me.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/3/the_green_light_attorney_philippe_sands

[PatSeg]

9. I remember hearing members of the Bush

administration and some right-wing journalism actually refer to "24" as a justification for torture. We used to watch the show and considered it far-fetched, but entertaining fiction. Evidently these people thought of the show as a how-to manual.

[gateley]

10. Didn't the Obama Administration STOP using torture? They haven't

stopped a lot of things they should have, but I'm pretty sure they stopped with the Enhanced Interrogations. :eyes:

I think it's in the news again because the Republicans are trying to claim credit for finding bin Laden, and to PROVE they were justified in their methods. Of course, they just ignore the proof that any relevant intel DIDN'T come from waterboarding.

:pals:

[Dragonfli]

12. It is still happening in Bagrahm and the places we use for rendition

They just don't brag about it like the last crew did.

[gateley]

24. I hate to hear that. The other day on MSNBC, probably, is when

I heard that "the Obama administration doesn't torture" so that made me feel good. Why on earth do we keep doing it? Besides the fact that it's sadistic and just wrong, it doesn't get them the results they want (except for Cheney, of course -- Keep doing it till they say what we want them to. :eyes:

[PatSeg]

19. I was so sure that most of them

would slink off into the night, grateful to be out of the spotlight and glad they'd avoided prosecution. Oh no, not these guys. They give new meaning to the word hubris. They not only don't avoid scrutiny, they invite it. "We broke the law, but laws don't apply to us. We defy you to do anything about it." Like the super villains on Saturday morning cartoons minus the shrill wicked laugh.




:hi:

[gateley]

23. It's like they're unrecognizable as human beings. Like they've been

possessed by something not human. Seriously. Great posts, Pat.

[PatSeg]

25. I always thought of the super villains

in movies and on TV as two-dimensional exaggerations. It never dawned on me that such people could possibly exist in real life or that there would be SO many of them. Pod people perhaps? Or Stepford politicians?

Thanks Gateley, always fun running into you.

[Dragonfli]

11. Because it is a law that our leaders felt should not be enforced

It is a lot like jury nullification where a jury sends a message that they do not think the offense should have been illegal and the person that committed the crime should therefore not be punished.

In this case it was Justice Department and Presidential nullification sending the message that it should not have been against the law and those that committed the crimes should not be punished.

Very simple really and the perps got the message "Torture is no crime and you can brag about it and discuss it as a good thing to do and there will be no punishment"

Torture is no longer illegal. No matter what national or international laws say. If it were illegal people would have been charged with the crime.

Very bold statement by Holder and Obama, but it set the precedent and the law is no longer enforced or enforceable.
It is also a very clear statement of support of war crimes and I fear the rest of the world is quite aware of the wink and the nod.

[PatSeg]

18. Of course, these same people are quick

to spout off about how Saddam tortured his "own" people (I guess its okay if it is "other" people?) and defied international law. Saddam was a criminal when he did it, but they are patriotic Americans.

Then there is the matter of degrees. Saddam's torture was really, really bad, but ours was just a little bit, like when my ex used to say, "If I'd really hit you, you'd be in the hospital".

So its okay to break the law if you don't do it as big and bad as the one we call "evil". Basically I guess they are saying it isn't what you do, but who you are, and the Cheneys and the Rices in this world think they are superior to everyone else, so the rules don't apply. Hey, it must be true, because they are all out there chatting it up on talk shows. "Look at me, I'm rich and free and there ain't nothing you can do about it."

[Hannah Bell]

13. "we"? "debate"? our government, our military, & our police use torture, period.

sometimes they pretend they don't. but they do.

[sabrina 1]

14. If there had been prosecutions, it would be different. But

when the government says one thing 'America doesn't torture' and then otoh since they know we HAVE, say they will not be prosecuting anyone for it because it's not as important as 'looking forward' at other more important things, it leaves the impression that it's high on the list of things we take seriously.

And then, when other countries whose citizens were victims of our torture policies decide to prosecute the accused criminals, we find out that our government protected them. What message does that send?

I know what you mean about not wanting to get used to it. It's hard to stay as outraged as we were when we first saw the Abu Ghraib photos, horrified would be a better word. I don't think that means we are getting used to it. I know I just feel hopeless at this point. I really expected to see investigations by Congress once Democrats gained a majority, but even Sen. Leahy's Committee seems to have done nothing.

[PatSeg]

21. The outrage had become so exhausting

and people can't sustain it for long periods of time without causing themselves considerable harm mentally and physically. I remember thinking toward the end of the Bush administration that "I don't want to be mad all the time", but if I wasn't angry, I felt like I was being complacent.

How on earth can we "look forward" when we haven't resolved the crimes done in our name?

[divvy]

15. People with mental illness can have great stamina and endurance.

Some just go on and on and on and on and on and on until they win by default. There is nobody left in the room.

[unhappycamper]

16. Perhaps it's time to look backward to see how we got into this mess.

:hide:

[mmonk]

17. Americans have been trained to accept the darkness the same way

other populations of bad governments past and present were. You dehumanize others long enough while pushing fear and ultra nationalism, you get what we have become and are still becoming.

[spanone]

20. because the republican party is the party of torture

it's now a political issue

[PatSeg]

22. Right along with

starving the poor, neglecting elderly, ignoring the sick, and enriching the advantaged. It most certainly isn't "my father's party" anymore.

[Matariki]

26. Thank you for your post.

I keep thinking our nation has gone completely insane.

[PatSeg]

29. I have to keep reminding myself

that this is NOT normal. It is frightening how quickly attitudes can change though. You wake up one day and find out you're living in a very different world. All those futuristic sci-fi movies were not so farfetched, more like prophetic.

[coalition_unwilling]

27. When the President of the United State and his Attorney General

announce that, in the interests of "looking forward," not only will no charges be filed, but no investigation will even happen, can you really blame the ordinary citizen?

Hell, half the people on this board who support(ed) the extra-judicial execution of OBL would have been just fine with torturing him had we taken him into captivity. All right, that's an unofficial and anecdotal figure, I admit, but seriously, judging from people's willingness on a progressive board like this to dispense with due process and the rule of law, I think I'm fairly realistic.

[PatSeg]

30. I have mixed feelings about Bin Laden's death

He was certainly an exceptional case, but I don't know how much my feelings reflect predominant public opinions. I would really like to see us as a society get out of the ridiculous "war on terror" mentality, so eliminating Bin Laden may help us in that respect.

As for "looking forward", I don't see how we can do that when so many crimes were not prosecuted. We are just giving future politicians and financiers license to break whatever laws they choose, knowing they won't be held accountable. Hey, prison is for the little guys, right?

[coalition_unwilling]

31. Instead of a 'war on terror,' I would like us to declare a 'war on greed.' But I

would settle for another 'War on Poverty'.

[PatSeg]

33. I would like to quit having "wars" on stuff,

but if we must have them, I really like your choices.

This declaring war on everything we don't like not only sounds aggressive, the "wars" usually don't work (i.e. War on Drugs). FDR used positive words like New Deal, reconstruction, recovery, relief, reform, conservation, etc. A lot of his success was in his ability to communicate and uplift people, and that can be seen his choice of words.

[coalition_unwilling]

35. I hope my facetiousness about a 'war on greed' came through. I think

the War on Poverty, begun under LBJ and laid to rest under Ronald Reagan, was and is one of the noblest efforts this country has ever embarked upon, second perhaps only to the Civil War. There were some signal successes in the WoP and I would argue that it simply did not go far enough.

FDR had what almost every Repuke and many Dems lack: empathy for people who were suffering and a willingness to stick a finger in the eye of his own economic class on behalf of those less fortunate. His 'choice of words' helped also, but it was the caring air he projected that came through.

[PatSeg]

36. Also, FDR used his savvy political skills to advance

his agenda. I don't know if we've ever seen anything like it before or since. He cut corners, bent laws, pissed off his adversaries, but somehow managed to pull the country out of the Great Depression in time to fight a world war. He was a rare and audacious leader with an incredible sense of humor that drove his enemies nuts.

But without the empathy, he might have just been a highly efficient, but arrogant dictator who got things done. I cease to be fascinated by the man.

[ecstatic]

28. Faux "News." I'm waiting for they day when the FCC will set some

minimum standards for what can be legally named as a "news" source.

[Zax2me]

32. Around and around we go.

Unable to end even the most obvious flaws of our country.
We really have a long way to go.

[PatSeg]

34. Its a lot easier and faster to get way off track

than it is to get back on track. History shows that many civilizations never got back on track. Hopefully we have the will to do so.

[Tace]

37. I've Concluded That Large Numbers Of Americans Are Sadistic Assholes

...That's the only thing I can think of to explain public acceptance of our government using torture.

Before the Cheney administration, torture is what Nazis did, and it was roundly condemned.

Beware, there are indeed large numbers of sadistic assholes in our midst.