Topic: Torture
Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, Coming Soon to a Theater Near You
If the American audience has become so desensitized to fictional torture, how can we expect Americans to protest the real deal?
by Raven West, J.D.
(libertarian)
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
As we continue to wrap our minds around the recent revelations of the "enhanced interrogation" techniques our military used to extract information from prisoners, the question which has never been asked, or answered, is what would ever motivate a rational human being to even contemplate any form of inflicting pain on another human being?
What mental process, if any, did any of those in command, from the President down, make to justify waterboarding, sleep depravation and the like inflicted on the victims? We all must ask ourselves, why isn't every citizen of this supposedly rational, civilized country calling for prosecution for all who participated?
Have we become so obsessed with vengeance after the 9/11 attacks that we have lost the very humanity which we have accused the "enemy" of never possessing when they murdered 3,000 people? In our patriotic zeal to keep America safe, have we lost our way?
We'll take to the streets, armed with soggy tea bags, and protest tax increases, then go back to our nice little lives the next day. Where are the protestors for crimes against humanity? Why are we so convinced that "enhanced interrogation" techniques, are justified, at any level?
Torture isn't a new concept. For as long as humans have walked this earth, we have found ways to inflict physical pain on others. Is there anyone who would argue that those who strapped helpless men to a plank and pored water into their mouths didn't derive a tiny bit of pleasure during the process? Some tiny voice, deep inside that spoke "this if for 9/11 you bastard", even if that person was totally innocent. They are the enemy, and they must suffer. As long as we can justify these atrocities by re-defining words, we can all sleep at night. Or can we?
Of course no one would ever admit this. We all aspire to a higher level of compassion and intelligence, and most would deny having even a tiny bit of the Maquis De Sade in them. But how else can we explain justifying torture, which by definition is the infliction of pain, or watching pain inflicted by others, unless there is some level of pleasure involved.
Because if we admit this, publically or privately, then we are no better than those who we seek to destroy. If this theory is to be disputed, then how can we explain the SAW "torture-porn" movie phenomenon which grossed 31.8 million dollars on its opening weekend? Millions purchase tickets for this so-called entertainment and enjoy watching people suffer.
Of course, the audience knows the blood and pain are all a combination of special effects and gory acting, but is there that much of a leap between fiction and reality when it comes to something as mild as, say waterboarding? If the American audience has become so desensitized to fictional torture, how can we expect Americans to protest the real deal?
At what point do we measure the level of human pain and suffering and call it torture and not sugar-coat physical and psychological abuse as simply a means to justify an end? Do a few choice words redefine reality so that we can all sleep better at night knowing that our government would never order our troops to actually torture someone. Instead of using a full battery of legal experts advising how to redefine the word torture, how about we simply do NOT inflict pain and suffering on any human being for any reason. Period.
It is not a question of the definition of torture we should be concerned about. It's the definition of who we are as Americans. It is our morals, high standards and unwavering principles which separates our commitment to freedom and liberty from those who wish to only destroy the same. It is our actions, not our words, which will be judged, long after the rhetoric is forgotten.
If we are to regain our respect as a powerful nation, we cannot afford to alter the meaning of words with cute phrases, false ignorance and lame excuses, which shows the world that we only have the power to do whatever it takes to get the results we want.
Changing the definition of the word torture to a more palatable phrase is not the change we voted for.
©2009 Raven West, J.D., all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Last modified: Tuesday, May 5, 2009
The views expressed in this
article are those of Raven West, J.D. only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Raven West, J.D. is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Raven West, J.D. of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Jake, the Champion of the Constitution
Date: 2009-05-06 09:22:43
Dear Raven -
Great piece, pictures of that guy from 24 torturing terrorists to get information kept flashing in my head while I was reading. While I can certainly understand the furor it would cause, I firmly believe that our highest officials are very likely guilty of torture, the evidence is such that many members of the Bush administration should be placed on trial.
Wondering if you read this piece by Mass School of Law? Velvel, the editor, was adversely effected since he invested with Madoff. http://www.mslaw.edu/MSLMedia/LTV/6.4.pdf
Perhaps each president takes a secret oath not to prosecute the predecessor for war crimes :) Here's my thoughts on the whole deal if you like http://www.nolanchart.com/article5596.html
Report violation
Posted By: Randy
Date: 2009-05-07 10:23:59
I fail to see anything wrong with making someone jump on one foot, listen to loud music, have water poured through their nose if it stops islamo nutjobs from murdering innocent people or getting ahold of a nuke. I do NOT agree with the PATRIOT ACT because it gives government the right to trample over basic constitutional rights of American Citizens (not like that was already uncommon); but if you want to draft a POW "bill of rights", go for it, I am sure the Obama Liberals will drink the Kool-aid, but I am not that naive. And yes the end does justify the means, sometimes.
Report violation
Posted By: Danny Middleton
Date: 2009-05-09 05:52:27
Concepts such as "Innocent until proven guilty" and "No cruel and unusual punishment shall be inflicted" are in the Constitution! And the Geneva Convention, which was supposed to be the laws of warfare! Don't recall either document saying "For Americans only" or "Does not apply to anyone the U.S. government has accused of being a terrorist"! Tomorrow the Obama administration could accuse political enemies of being "domestic terrorists" and torture false confessions out of them! It's a slippery slope when you start excusing the torture of anyone!
Report violation