Tortured Logic

Watch this video, then go to The Tortured Logic website to see what you can do to demand justice. If we don't do something about this awful chapter in our history, we will be doomed to repeat it.

That's just not what we are about.

The Choices We Face

Sadism and indifference

The interrogator faces his choice when the order to torture comes down from on high. The people face their choice when reports of what he did are made public, as is happening. If the people choose denial, the pathology of torture tends to reproduce itself in the society at large. The result is a kind of cognitive dislocation, which can be more or less severe. Fundamental human capacities begin to atrophy or are impaired. Certainly, abuse of human beings and abuse of words go hand in hand. The words that name the deed fog over, or are driven from the language. Refusal to face the fact of torture has cost us the very word "torture," now widely referred to, as if in obedience to some general edict, as "enhanced interrogation techniques" or "harsh methods." Torture's writ thus runs in the editorial rooms of newspapers.  ~Jonathan Schell, Torture and Truth

Every teacher knows that what you do in front of the classroom is far more important than what you say; you can post any number of rules for classroom behavior, but if you comport yourself in a dignified and polite manner your behavior will be mirrored in your students' behavior. 

I believe that it is the same for a government. It is not enough for an administration to say that they believe in the rule of law and that they never would use torture against prisoners; if they act lawlessly and torture those who are in their power, they will soon see a lawless and uncivilized citizenry mirroring that behavior. In fact, I just read an article about a local crime in a New Hampshire newspaper called, "Invasion Victims Describe Torture Threats." Should we be surprised at these thugs' willingness to tie up, whip, and defecate on their victims, given the daily revelations we are hearing about the Bush Administration years? 

One of the best articles that I have read arguing for war crime trials is this one: Torture and Truth; Can the United States Really Get Things Right By Turning Away From the Past? by Jonathan Schell, writing for CBS News. I would highly recommend that you take a moment to read it.

The Dark Side; The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals

Here is the story of how we got to where we are today--each step that moved us from being a democracy run by the rule of law into a country that holds prisoners indefinitely without being charged, kidnaps people and takes them to secret prisons, and tortures those it holds through sleep and sensory deprivation, beatings, waterboarding, and all the other sorry phrases we've been hearing on the news. 

Here are a few quotes from the Afterword:

...a battle for America's security became, and continues to be, a battle for the country's soul.

... the Bush Administration was warned that the short-term benefits of its extralegal approach to fighting terrorism would have tragically destructive long-term consequences both for the rule of law and America's interests in the world.

... the Bush Administration invoked the fear flowing from the attacks on September 11 to institute a policy of deliberate cruelty that would have been unthinkable on September 10.

... President Bush and Vice President Cheney have continued to insist that they never authorized or condoned "torture," which they acknowledge is criminal under U.S. law. But their semantic parsing of the term began to seem increasingly disingenuous as details from the secret detention and interrogation program surfaced, piece by piece.

"Prisoners of War Must at All Times Be Humanely Treated"

Did you know that in January of 2008, Canada placed the U.S. on a list of rogue countries that torture? See the BBC News article, "Canada Puts U.S. on Torture List."

We are hearing so much these days about how the Bush Administration decided to stop obeying the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners, that I think it is worthwhile to first, define the meaning of "Geneva Conventions;" and second, to publish the pertinent clauses. 

Definition of "Geneva Conventions," from The U.S. Military History Companion at Answers.com: 

The Geneva Convention of 22 August 1864 was the world's first multilateral humanitarian treaty. Sixteen nations were present, responding to public concern about the sufferings of sick and wounded soldiers, well publicized by the labors of Florence Nightingale in the Crimean War, Clara Barton and the U.S. Sanitary Commission in the American Civil War, and the dramatic book The Memory of Solferino(1862) by Henry Dunant, a Swiss, about the casualties at the Battle of Solferino in 1859. Dunant and four other Genevan philanthropists had already launched, in October 1863, what would become the international Red Cross movement. Now the twelve initial signatories bound their armies to respect and protect the lives and workplaces of each other's ambulance and medical personnel; to incorporate volunteer auxiliaries into their medical corps; and to signify their virtual neutrality by a protective emblem, “a red cross on a white ground.” The United States acceded to the convention in 1882.

Pertinent Clauses on the Treatment of Prisoners: These are quoted from the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Genevafrom 21 April to 12 August, 1949; entry into force 21 October 1950 (as published by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). The complete text may be seen here. Further information may be obtained at The Geneva Conventions; A Reference Guide published by the Society of Professional Journalists.

...the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; (Article 3)

Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity. 

Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited. (Article 13)

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind. (Article 17)

Collective punishment for individual acts, corporal punishments, imprisonment in premises without daylight and, in general, any form of torture or cruelty, are forbidden. (Article 87)

Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, compelling a prisoner of war to serve in the forces of the hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a prisoner of war of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in this Convention. (Article 130)

An Unwilling Collaborator

From the first time I learned anything about the Holocaust, I was left with questions: Didn't the German people know what was going on? How could they allow their country to murder millions of people? Why didn't they stop the horror?

The same kinds of questions can be asked about the American people over the last eight years. How were we duped into a war in Iraq? How could we allow our government to kidnap suspected terrorists and take them to secret prison sites? How could we allow prisoners to be held indefinitely without charges? How could we allow the torture of prisoners? How could we stand by as our lofty American ideals were tossed aside in the "war on terror?"

I don't have the answers, but I can say what happened as I lived through the days after Sept. 11 when the world stood with us in horror at what had happened on our soil. I began to have a feeling of uneasiness when the first waves of patriotic fervor overtook almost everyone around me. In our town, practically everyone was displaying the flag in support of our country, but this show of love of country almost imperceptibly slid into sideways glances of suspicion about those who did not fly the flag or wear a flag pin every day. 

I began to be afraid of my government. They were moving from the first moments when they pulled everyone together and calmed fears after 9/11, to a headlong rush toward finding terrorists, or suspected terrorists, or potential terrorists, at any cost.  Indeed, the word terrorist came to mean practically anyone that the administration rounded up and tossed into prison.

They suspended the rule of law, even though their hired lawyers always found ways to express that everything they did was still within some strange interpretation of the letter of the law. 

They decided that we no longer needed to follow the Geneva Conventions about the treatment of prisoners in war time.

They ignored everything our country stood for. 

All the while that I am writing my cheerier posts about dogs and cats and knitting and reading and my newly adopted state of New Mexico, I am thinking about what has happened to my country and wondering how we can deal with these terrible things. 

I think, too, about the German people back during World War II. Did they feel, as I do, that they were unwilling collaborators in a great and terrible sin?