[IP] [Politics] This is being done in our name? Unacceptable.
Posted on Sun, Dec. 05, 2004
This is being done in our name? Unacceptable.
By Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
It is both peculiar and chilling to find oneself discussing the problem
of American torture.
I have considered support of basic human rights and dignity so much a
part of our national identity that this feels as strange as though I'd
suddenly become Chinese or found Fidel Castro in the refrigerator.
One's first response to the report by the International Red Cross about
torture at our prison at Guantanamo is denial. But our country has
opposed torture since its founding. One of our founding principles is
that cruel and unusual punishment is both illegal and wrong. Every
year, our State Department issues a report grading other countries on
their support for or violations of human rights.
The first requirement here is that we look at what we are doing -- and
not blink, not use euphemisms.
Despite the Red Cross' polite language, this is not "tantamount to
torture." It's torture. It is not "detainee abuse." It's torture. If
they were doing it to you, you would know it was torture. It must be
hidden away, because it's happening in Cuba or elsewhere abroad.
Yes, it's true, we did sort of know this already. It was clear when the
Abu Ghraib scandal broke in Iraq that the infection had come from
Guantanamo. The infamous memos by Alberto Gonzales, our next attorney
general, and by John Ashcroft's "Justice" Department pretty well laid
it out.
In a way, Abu Ghraib, as bizarrely sadistic as it was, is easier to
understand than this cold, relentless and apparently endless procedure
at Gitmo.
At least Abu Ghraib took place in the context of war. At Guantanamo,
there is no threat to anyone -- Americans are not being killed or hurt
there.
"The construction of such a system, whose stated purpose is the
production of intelligence, cannot be considered other than an
intentional system of cruel, unusual and degrading treatment, and a
form of torture," the Red Cross report says.
Our country, the one you and I are responsible for, has imprisoned
these "illegal combatants" for three years now. What else do we expect
to get out of them?
We don't even release their names or say what they're charged with --
whether they're Taliban, al Qaeda or just some farmers who happened to
get in the way (in Afghanistan, farmers and soldiers are apt to be the
same).
If this hasn't been established in three years, when will it be? How
long are they to be subjected to "humiliating acts, solitary
confinement, temperature extremes, use of forced positions"?
In the name of Jesus Christ Almighty, why are people who are
representing our government, paid by us, writing filth on the Qurans of
helpless prisoners? Is this American? Is it Christian? What are our
moral values? Where is the clergy on this? Speak out, speak up.
The creepiest aspect of the Red Cross report is the involvement of
doctors and psychiatrists in something called "Biscuit" teams. Get used
to that term; it's short for behavioral science consultation team and
will end up in the same category of national shame as Wounded Knee.
According to The New York Times, Biscuit teams are "composed of
psychologists and psychological workers who advise the interrogators."
Shades of Dr. Mengele.
An earlier Red Cross report questioned whether "psychological torture"
was taking place. I guess that's what you call sleep deprivation and
prolonged exposure to extremely loud noises while shackled to a chair.
The beatings reported would not be psychological torture. I pass over
the apparently abandoned practice of sexual taunting. The Red Cross
also reports a far greater incidence of mental illness caused by
stress.
If you have neither the imagination nor the empathy to envision
yourself in such circumstances, please consider why the senior
commanders in the military are so horrified by this.
It's very simple: If we do this, if we break international law and the
conventions of warfare, then the same thing can be done to American
soldiers who are captured abroad.
Any country can use exactly the same lame rationale about "enemy
combatants" to torture American troops in any kind of conflict. Then we
would protest to the Red Cross, of course.
I suppose one could argue that we're fighting people who chop off the
heads of their prisoners, so there. Since when have we taken up Abu
al-Zarqawi as a role model?
In the famous hypothetical example, you might consider torture
justified if you had a terrorist who knew where a bomb was planted that
was about to go off. But three years later?
Some people have got to be held accountable for this, and that would
include Congress.
My question is: What are you going to do about this?
It's your country, your money, your government. You own it; you run it;
you are the board of directors. They are doing this in your name. The
people we elect to public office do what you want them to do. Perhaps
you should get in touch with them.
Molly Ivins writes for Creators Syndicate. 5777 W. Century Blvd., Suite
700, Los Angeles, CA 90045
© 2004 Star-Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.dfw.com
<http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/columnists/molly_ivins/
10338747.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp>
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/