SO DO WE AND SHOULD WE TORTURE?
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
SO DO WE AND SHOULD WE TORTURE?
And we thought Jack Bauer on the Fox TV show “24” was heavy handed
in his use of torture techniques. Jack
was a piker compared to CIA operatives who utilized about every method of pain
infliction imaginable. And then, Vice
President Dick Chaney make it clear America had to move to “the dark
side.” The ends justified the means if
we were to protect our freedoms. But did
we, and at what cost?
The controversy ignited last week when the Senate Intelligence
Committee issued a damning report claiming that post 9/11, the CIA undertook an
elaborate scheme to torture purported terrorists in violation of federal
law. The report also concluded that the
program of “enhanced interrogations techniques” was incompetent and provided
little useful information. Democratic
senators cheered, but Republicans, with a few exceptions shouted it was all
about politics. So what does a
reasonable examination of the facts show?
First, torture is illegal under both U.S. and international
law. Specifically, 18 U.S. Code § 2340A, states: “Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to
commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20
years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by
this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years
or for life.” No exceptions for any
government official. Cheney’s “dark
side” argument doesn’t hold water under federal law. If America wants to torture, then change the
law.
Secondly,
did CIA operatives actually torture? I
guess it’s how the “enhanced techniques” are defined. The senate report describes detainees being
water boarded, rectally force fed, repeatedly beaten, hanged and handcuffed to an
overhead bar for 22-hour periods, left in total darkness and cold temperatures,
hooded and shackled, forced to stay awake for up to 180 hours while “standing
or in painful stress positions, at times with their hands shackled above their
heads in isolated cells with loud noise or music and only a bucket to use for
human waste.” Pretty damning evidence
that these detainees were more than just “roughed up” a bit.
So is torture
effective? Not according to many in the
military. Republican Senator John
McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in 2012, was tortured as a prisoner
of war in North Vietnam. He was
repeatedly beaten, his ribs shattered, his arm rebroken, and he was kept in
terrible conditions in solitary confinement for two years. His opinion? You don’t get reliable
information from torture. Prisoners will
say anything they think interrogators want to hear. McCain said on the Senate floor last week
that: “torture actually damages our security interests as well as our
reputation as a force for good in the world.”
McCain joins a
long list of military generals and admirals, including former General and
Secretary of State Colin Powell, who agree that torture is ineffective an essentially
impairs efforts to gain reliable information. It’s strange that the most vocal
proponents in favor of torture are those that never served a day in the
military. So called “chicken hawks” like
Chaney, who received five draft deferments, and when asked why he did not join
the service, responded that he had “other priorities.” You can add just about every potential
presidential candidate in 2016 who want to send your son or daughter off to war
without volunteering to do so themselves.
CIA
field officer and interrogator Glen Carle was a guest on my syndicated radio
program last weekend, and he was forthright in saying it is implausible that
torture gains any reliable information.
His book, The Interrogator,
concludes that torture is ineffective and illegal. Carle writes: “The 'ticking
time bomb' scenario rests on the flawed assumption that, somehow, torture would
provide desperately needed information not otherwise obtainable in enough time
to stop the threat. But when people are tortured, they will say anything to try
to stop the pain."
After
9/11, a number of well-meaning government officials made decisions that they
felt were necessary to protect the nation.
It’s easy to second guess.
Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and jailed those who opposed his views
on the civil war. During World War II,
Roosevelt interred thousands of Japanese Americans out of fear. But when the initial fears settle down, it’s
critical that America retain a moral clarity.
If
only it were as simple as Jack Bauer tried to make it in “24.” But the world is not so black and white. John McCain said it eloquently last week. “The question isn’t about our enemies. It’s about us. It’s about who we were, who we are and who we
aspire to be.”
Peace
and Justice
Jim
Brown
Jim Brown’s
syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the
nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and
see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s
nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am,
central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home