Posted by Nicholas | The new Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, says that he is against torture but that he doesn’t know if waterboarding is torture or not. Well, gosh, yes, that is a tricky question. Let’s see if we can help him here. Now then, in the old days, if a regime wanted information, or to force a confession, they had a variety of inventive means at their disposal:
They could strap the victim to the rack and stretch him till his joints dislocated. They could use red hot irons. They could flog, starve or flay their victim. There was an endless supply of methods available to them, because sadly man’s inventiveness in causing pain and misery to his fellow man seems unlimited. What these all had in common was that they used pain, fear and terror as a means of loosening a man’s tongue. And the word for that is torture.
Waterboarding now, does that cause pain, fear or terror? Well, they strap a man to a board, so he cannot move, stuff a rag or sponge into his mouth, and pour water into it or put a rag over his face and pour water onto it. “Simulated drowning” is the mealey mouthed term for it. Water enters his mouth and nose, fills his throat and airway, he can’t breathe, and oxygen can’t get to his brain, and if that isn’t enough to cause pain and terror I don’t know what is.
It is torture just as much as if they had burned or flogged him. And you know what, Mr Mukasey? It is wrong. It is a course of conduct that no nation that claims to be civilized should ever follow, especially a nation that likes to think that it is an inspiration to others.
But wait a second. Am I overlooking something important? What if a situation arises where you have to have information very quickly to save American lives? There’s a bomb hidden somewhere, for example, and a captured member of Al-Quaida knows where it is. How about we torture him a bit to get the answer? It’s to save lives, after all, and he is only an Arab. There’s no harm in that, in the long run, surely.
But what if he doesn’t know? How far do you go with your “simulated drowning”? Till he dies perhaps? Or, and this isn’t an impossible situation, you suspect that one of a group of prisoners my know something. Do you waterboard the lot of them, one by one, whistling Yankee Doodle as you towel down and dry off the innocent ones till you get the right man? Remember, it’s being done to save American lives.
One of the arguments against torture is that people will say anything to make the pain stop, whether it is true or not. There is nothing unusual about false confessions – people will say what they think their interrogators want to hear. And since it is what the interrogators what to hear, they stop the torture as soon as they hear it. This renders the whole exercise useless.
To their great credit, service chiefs have spoken out against torture, and it is by no means certain that the US armed forces will be required to use it. No word, though, about the private contractors in Iraq. Mercenaries, in other words, even though they don’t like to be called that (I’m sure we can arrange to call them military prostitutes if they prefer). They are the ones who will most likely be called upon to use torture against Arabs. Until recently, these creatures were exempt from Iraqi law, from American law, and from International law. They literally could do anything they wanted. The situation is less clear now, and the Iraqi government said they wanted these mercenaries out of their country but so far they show little sign of leaving, and while they are there they will be the ones called upon to use “aggressive interrogation” on, well, anyone they want to really. The Iraqi government doesn’t seem to be able to stop them, and any attempt by the US Congress to pass legislation banning waterboarding will most likely run into a Presidential veto. In fact, if you saw the debate in question, the Republican candidates for the Presidency have all been trying to outdo each other about how determined they are to use torture as much as needed. It was an exhibition of political macho, with a subtext of “Vote for me and I’ll make sure those Ay-rabs suffer!” which is bound to strike a chord with a certain type of voter.
Adding to this sorry cauldron of ideas comes Alan Dershowitz, a lawyer and writer of distinction, who makes the obligatory comment that he is against torture but then goes on to point out how successfully it was used by the Nazis against the French Resistance. That beggars belief. Is he seriously using them as a role model? Yes, sometimes the Germans used torture to great effect. They didn’t care what they did to their prisoners. Himmler said that if a thousand Russian women died from exhaustion digging an anti-tank ditch for the German army, his only concern was that the ditch was dug. The Germans also used hostage taking and torture of prisoner’s families to extract information. Now there’s an idea – I bet old Abdul will tell you where the time bomb is hidden when he sees Blackwater operatives waterboarding his ten-year old daughter. And of course it will all be done to save American lives, don’t forget, so we can all sleep easy with clear consciences.
But here’s a thought. Weren’t torturers put on trial after the war? Wasn’t the issue settled at Nuremberg? All pleas that the Nazis had no alternative but to torture resistance suspect because they needed to know here bombs were hidden, etc etc were rejected. It didn’t cut any ice then and it shouldn’t now. The precedent was set. Torture was deemed wrong, and declared a war crime. Men were hanged for it.
The matter of finding the ticking time bomb remains a knotty problem. If I had a relative in Iraq, my judgment would be warped enough for me to convince myself that a descent to medieval practices would be acceptable or even welcome. But it would be wrong because if you allow Americans to behave like the Spanish Inquisition, with full governmental approval, you degrade America. Saving American lives is of vital importance but if it is used as an excuse to commit what have been established as war crimes, for any reason, then America as a nation and a moral entity is the loser. Torture degrades and dehumanizes the torturer. You are not being soft on someone because you decline to torture him. You are treating him as a human being, any human being, should treat any other.
The problem remains unsolved, but isn’t it a shame, a really bitter, crying shame, that the nation that was so instrumental in defeating the Nazi regime now has a president with the apparent moral compass of Heinrich Himmler and a row of presidential candidates all boasting about how they want Americans to behave like the Gestapo?
RELATED BN-POLITICS POSTINGS
Military Interrogator: Torture isn't Operationally Effective
Waterboarding: Learn What It's Like & Why It's Good for You in Two Easy Lessons
US Military & Intelligence Officials Weigh in on Torture Issue (Deaf Ears Dept)
Bush Administration Blocked Critic Who Experienced Waterboarding
I say 'Torture'; You Say 'Harsh Interrogation Techniques'.... (Updated)
.
Holy Shit, is this isn't torture I wonder what the hell is...
What the hell??? I'm just soo sick of the freaking USA doing this, enabling this and being a part of this...
It sickens me!!!!
Posted by: No nonsense girl | November 11, 2007 at 03:16 PM
yes, that is disturbing. quite disturbing.
i am really sick of this administration and really hope people see the light when it comes to voting for the next.
Posted by: jehara | November 12, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I've said this over and over again but I don't think anyone should determine policy about torture unless they have been through it. SERE at least! There's simply no way to evaluate what is or isn't torture until it's done to you. Period.
I think Mr. Mukasey should go to Fort Bragg or San Diego and ask Special Forces to give him a sample. Then he can decide.
Posted by: Open Grove Claudia | November 12, 2007 at 04:15 PM
Great post, Nicholas, and one that I whole-heartedly agree with. Have you read 'Waiting For The Barbarians' by the South African author J.M. Coatzee? I just taught it for the second time to my first semester students, and it has, I think, a lot of relevance to the current situation in the 'war on terror', particularly the dependence on the 'other' in order to construct identity, the politics of Empire and the efficacy of torture. I know how much you enjoy literature, Nicholas, and I think this short novel would provide a lot of food for thought.
Posted by: amypalko | November 14, 2007 at 03:15 AM